walt74 + nct   200

Sad Radicals: dogma and cultlike behaviour within the illiberal Left
Good one about dogma and cultlike behaviour within the illiberal Left: https://quillette.com/2018/12/11/sad-radicals/
The paradigm of suspicion leaves the radical exhausted and misanthropic, because any action or statement can be shown with sufficient effort to hide privilege, a microaggression, or unconscious bias. Quoted in JM, the anarchist professor Richard Day proposes “infinite responsibility”: “we can never allow ourselves to think that we are ‘done,’ that we have identified all of the sites, structures, and processes of oppression ‘out there’ or ‘in here,’ inside our own individual and group identities.” Infinite responsibility means infinite guilt, a kind of Christianity without salvation: to see power in every interaction is to see sin in every interaction. All that the activist can offer to absolve herself is Sisyphean effort until burnout. Eady’s summarization is simpler: “Everything is problematic.”

This effort is not only directed at the self, but also outwards. Morality and politics are intertwined in this system so that good politics become indicative of good morality. Montgomery and Bergman skewer this tendency mercilessly: “To remain pious, the priest must reveal new sins … The new Other is the not-radical-enough, the liberal, the perpetrator, the oppressor.” Because one’s good moral standing can never be guaranteed, the best way to maintain it is to attack the moral standing of others. As Montgomery and Bergman point out, this is also a thrilling and actionable alternative to the discouragement that haunts radicals after each loss in conflict with capitalism and the state. This is how cliques and status games emerge in communities that purport to be opposed to all hierarchy, turning people into what Freddie DeBoer once dubbed “offense archaeologists.”

Bland friendships and events are the result. Conversations are awkward and tense as radicals contort to avoid the risk of hurting each other. As an anarchist, I did not engage with individuals as individuals, but as porcelain, always thinking first and foremost of the group identities we inhabited.

Escape from the paradigm of suspicion is hindered by kafkatrapping: the idea that opposition to the radical viewpoint proves the radical viewpoint. Minorities who question it have internalized their oppression, and privileged individuals who question it prove their guilt. The only thing radicals are not suspicious of is the need for relentless suspicion. As Haidt and Greg Lukianoff write of similar norms on campuses, “If someone wanted to create an environment of perpetual anger and intergroup conflict, this would be an effective way to do it.”
IlliberalLeft  nct  ncpin  IdentityPolitics  Left 
7 days ago by walt74
"Sanction": The Triumph of Ayn Rand's Worst Idea
Link: https://www.econlib.org/sanction-the-triumph-of-ayn-rands-worst-idea/
In Randian jargon, we must never grant our intellectual enemies our “moral sanction.” Simply put, “[I]n no case and in no situation may one permit one’s own values to be attacked or denounced, and keep silent.” Building on this position, Rand’s inner circle ultimately denounced not only “sanctioning,” but “sanctioning the sanctioners.” Randian Peter Schwartz, who coined the latter phrase, elaborated:

The weapon necessary to defend against evil is justice: the unequivocal identification of the evil as evil. This means the refusal to grant it, by word or by deed, any moral respectability. It is by scrupulously withholding from the irrational even a crumb of a moral sanction — by rejecting any form of accommodation with the irrational — by forcing the irrational to stand naked and unaided — that one keeps evil impotent.

What does this mean in practice? Don’t talk to your intellectual enemies – and don’t talk to people who talk to your intellectual enemies.


Whats really funny about this quote is: Most internet-libertarians arguing for free speech who would actually call themselves "randian" at least to some extend, would absolutely not engage in her denounciation of sanction, that is: They would always talk to their intellectual enemy. And those who would never call themselves "randian" to any extend (lefties, anti-neolibs) would never talk to their intellectual enemies these days because they are "evil". So, the Anti-Randians are Randians and the Randians are Anti-Randians now. What a time to be alive.
Philosophy  DGNI  IlliberalLeft  nct  ncpin 
24 days ago by walt74
The internet is a manifestation of our psyches—neither better nor worse
I'm beating that same drum for a while now.

Link: https://qz.com/1398398/the-internet-is-a-manifestation-of-our-psyches-neither-better-nor-worse/
While some of psychiatrist Sigmund Freud’s work has been criticized, his model of the mind has survived and made its way into common parlance. In Freud’s view, the human mind is divided in three parts: the id, ego, and superego. The id is the instinctive and impulsive part of us we are born with, a primal self driven by basic desires and emotions—sexual craving, hunger, anger. The ego is strategic but not moral—like the id, it wants to maximize pleasure but the ego also tries to balance the primal desires with the demands of society. Finally, the superego imposes morality and values.

The web has elements that activate each of Freud’s designations. It’s true that the web has a dark side, with markets where guns and sex and drugs are sold. However, the dark web didn’t create crime or depravity—it simply made a virtual place for the kinds of things some people do in the physical world.

The ego’s desires, too, find a place online. Our constant consumerism and our boastful social media presences are evidence of the ego at work. We are beasts hungry for validation, feeding a part of the self that can’t be sated.

Finally, there’s the superego. And that, too, manifests on the web in efforts to unite for good causes. GoFundMe and KickStarter campaigns are used to fund medical treatments, support social movements, and contribute individuals who become important public figures.

More manifestations of the superego at work on the web are efforts to save lives in the face of human-created or natural disasters, even in the simple desire to connect with others near and far, in our expanded view of ourselves as part of a global culture.

Everything that happens now in our hyperreal existence is an expression of the human mind, which has always been capable of dreaming up horrible and glorious things. What’s new is that we have a tool that allows us to tap into and record the collective consciousness, its darkness and its light.

We need not despair that the internet will destroy humanity as we know it because humans have never been that awesome. Instead, we should be asking ourselves how to live better in light of the tools and knowledge we do have, how to manage ourselves and develop the skills to cultivate a more illuminated consciousness.

Perhaps it’s much simpler than we think. Maybe it’s as easy as minding ourselves, each of us individually, considering our contributions to the web as a communal act, seeing that each tweet and post and photo is creating a record that we share and that has the power to influence others exponentially. If we came to understand the internet for what it is, our village, our group project, our public square, we might be more inclined turn it into a very nice place to visit.
nct  ncpin  DGNI  Psychology 
25 days ago by walt74
Science Is Getting Less Bang for Its Buck
I'm trying to say something similar regarding aesthetics for a while now, but I started recognizing that phenomenon with technological innovations, which stalled somewhere in the 90s for me and it dawned on me quite early, that scientific progress just isn't the progress anymore we once were used to. The article is not all gloom and doom tho, new fields could open new areas of discovery, but classic science it seems, has played its hand.

So „the evidence is that science has slowed enormously per dollar or hour spent. That evidence demands a large-scale institutional response. It should be a major subject in public policy, and at grant agencies and universities. Better understanding the cause of this phenomenon is important, and identifying ways to reverse it is one of the greatest opportunities to improve our future.“

Link: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/diminishing-returns-science/575665/
nct  ncpin  Science  CultureLoop  Innovation  TheBigStandstill 
26 days ago by walt74
How populism became the concept that defines our age
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/22/populism-concept-defines-our-age

Most scholars use populism as a set of ideas focused on an opposition between the people (good) and the elite (bad), although they still disagree on whether it is a fully fledged ideology or more a political discourse or style.

Paradoxically, now that we finally agree on what we mean by populism per se, the “populist phenomenon” in practice is almost exclusively populist radical right. The much expected, and hoped-for, leftwing populist wave has not happened. And while intellectuals and pundits of the left keep assuring us that the only future is an inclusionary leftwing populism, existing leftwing populism has turned nasty in Latin America and and become much less leftwing (Syriza) or less populist (Podemos) in Europe.

Consequently, we increasingly talk about a general populism when we’re actually referring primarily, and often exclusively, to a specific populism. I have called this the populist radical right, rather than radical right populism, because it is a populist form of the radical right rather than a radical right form of populism. Ideologically, authoritarianism and nativism determine the populism, rather than the other way around.

As decades of research have shown, the prime ideological feature of this group of parties and their supporters is nativism, a xenophobic form of nationalism. It is not surprising then that the main consequence of the “rise of populism” is a battery of policies that restrict the rights of “alien others” – most notably immigrants, Muslims and refugees – not of “native” elites. […]

It is noteworthy that in the early 20th century, nationalism and socialism mobilised mainly as anti-democratic extremism, whereas at the beginning of the 21st century populists are mainly democratic but anti-liberal. At the very least, this shows that democracy (popular sovereignty and majority rule) is now hegemonic, whereas liberal democracy – which adds key features such as minority rights, rule of law and separation of powers – is not.
DGNI  nct  ncpin  Populism  Right  Left 
26 days ago by walt74
A Brand New Interview with David Foster Wallace
Link: https://electricliterature.com/a-brand-new-interview-with-david-foster-wallace-71c03223294b

Eighteen years ago, writer and translator Eduardo Lago sat down with David Foster Wallace for a discussion that ranged from pedagogy to tennis to the influence of the internet on literature. The interview remained unpublished until Lago, an award-winning Spanish novelist, critic, and translator who teaches at Sarah Lawrence College, included it in his new book Walt Whitman ya no vive aquí, ten years after Wallace’s death. It has never been published before in English. The conversation has been lightly edited for readability. […]

EL: how do you think the internet is affecting the art of fiction?

DFW: I think that’s a terrific question. Most of the journalism I read in America right now is interested in how the internet is going to affect the business of publishing. I personally think that the internet represents simply an enormous flood of available information and entertainment and sensations with very little assistance to the consumer in terms of choosing, finding, discerning between those choices and this sort of rabid, capitalist fervor with which the internet is being not just developed but invested in. I don’t have to tell you about the .com stock market explosion and all that. It seems to me, as just a layman and an amateur, that the internet is almost the perfect distillation of the American capitalist ethos, a flood of seductive choices. It’s completely laissez-faire, with no really effective engines for choosing or searching and everybody being much more interested in the economic and material aspects of it than some of the aesthetic and ethical and moral and political questions attached to it. I can’t think of a better summing up of what America’s strengths and weaknesses are right now, and I’m sure that there are writers who are interested in in the internet as a tool in fiction. As far as I can think it’s really only Richard Powers in Galatea 2.2 and he’s got a new book out called Plowing the Dark, which is partially about virtual reality. Powers, who is himself kind of a cyber-scientist, is really the only one who I think found really effective ways to use the web and the internet as an as an actual tool in fiction. I think most of the rest of us are kind of just standing around with our mouths open, amazed that everybody’s so excited about a phenomenon that really is nothing more than an exaggeration of what we’ve had up ’til now. […]

EL: I’m fascinated by your use of footnotes in Infinite Jest and other books. On the one hand one could see them perhaps as a trademark of “academic writing”; on the other, it is a highly original form of innovation a way of restructuring plots, a fragmentary form of storytelling. Do you have a poetics of the footnote, and what would that poetics be like?

DFW: Not really. I started using them for Infinite Jest as a way to create one more sense of doubleness. One of the things that seems to me to be artificial about most fiction is that it pretends as if experience and thought and perception are linear and singular and that we’re thinking and feeling only one way at a certain point in time. You know, some of that is the constraint of the page, and I think to an extent the footnotes are to suggest at least a kind of doubling that I think is a little more realistic.
nct  ncpin  Literature  DavidFosterWallace  Interview 
27 days ago by walt74
Tracing a Meme From the Internet’s Fringe to a Republican Slogan
Since President Trump’s election, his loyalists online have provided him with a steady stream of provocative posts and shareable memes, often filtered up from platforms like Reddit through media channels like Fox News. In return, Mr. Trump has championed many of their messages as his own, amplifying them back to his larger base.

This feedback loop is how #JobsNotMobs came to be. In less than two weeks, the three-word phrase expanded from corners of the right-wing internet onto some of the most prominent political stages in the country, days before the midterm elections.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/04/technology/jobs-not-mobs.html
Memetics  DGNI  nct  ncpin 
29 days ago by walt74
Why Echo Chambers are Useful
Paper: Why Echo Chambers are Useful http://olejann.net/wp-content/uploads/echo_chambers.pdf
Link: https://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2018/10/echo-chambers-a-defence.html

If we know we’re speaking among friends, we can be more candid. “Safe spaces” can free like-minded people to express sentiments they would otherwise repress if they feared they’d be exploited by their opponents. The model here is perhaps the Chatham House rule, which allows speech to be reported outside as long as it isn’t credited to a particular person. This frees people to speak more freely than they otherwise would. “Safe spaces may provide opportunities to communicate that would otherwise not exist” say Jann and Schottmuller. JudeanPeoplesFront

Now, there are caveats here. All this takes for granted that there is sharp polarization. It would be better if there weren’t and that we could speak freely and credibly across divisions. Given that we cannot, however, echo chambers might be a way to improve communication and to get messages across that would otherwise be ignored.

Also, this requires that there be some degree of diversity within the chambers. If people were to endlessly split and create new echo chambers after every slight disagreement – as the People’s Front of Judea and some Trotskyites have done – then information is lost anyway.
Filterbubbles  DGNI  nct  ncpin 
29 days ago by walt74
It Started as an Online Gaming Prank. Then It Turned Deadly
Link: https://www.wired.com/story/swatting-deadly-online-gaming-prank/ | http://archive.is/pS69t
Barriss himself was swatted by a fellow Halo player in February 2015, but the experience titillated rather than cowed him. “I remember hearing the helicopter hovering over our house for about five minutes before I realized it had to be a police chopper,” he tells me. “How cool would it be, I thought, if I could do that to anyone I wanted. It was just appealing to me, to be able to completely and anonymously own someone like that and not get caught.” Soon after that epiphany, he began to teach himself the skills necessary to swat his enemies. He wrote and revised call scripts, making each one more dramatic yet plausible than the last. He figured out how to obtain temporary phone numbers with area codes that wouldn’t make 911 operators suspicious. And he tried to scrub the internet of his personal information, so his victims would find it difficult to locate his home address and respond in kind.

Barriss quickly became addicted to the thrill of swatting. “It was like a kind of online power,” he says. “Knowing that you’re breaking the law, and knowing that they won’t be able to find you, and knowing you just sent the SWAT team or bomb squad somewhere, and knowing you could do that over and over again.” He crowed to his grandmother about his achievements and described himself to her as a “hacking god.”

But Barriss’ swatting career was interrupted by his arrest for the KABC-TV bomb threats. He pleaded no contest to two felony counts of making a false bomb report and was sentenced to two years and eight months in the Los Angeles County Jail. With credit for time served and good behavior, he was released on January 20, 2017.

The next day, Barriss was arrested for illegally entering his grandmother Wendy’s house. According to police, Gregory lived in constant fear of her grandson and had taken out a protective order against him. Barriss pleaded no contest to violating that order and was sentenced to another 364 days in jail. When he finally went free again that August, after serving about half his term, he moved into a homeless shelter near Exposition Park in South Los Angeles as he waited for a Section 8 apartment to open up. The shelter is a 15-minute walk from a public library, which is where Barriss used the free computers to quietly resume his campaign of terror.

He started with bomb threats again. Barriss had once harbored a vague aspiration to earn fame on the professional gaming scene as a Halo champion; now he sought to make a name for himself by tormenting gamers who’d attained celebrity. In early December 2017, he twice caused the evacuation of a major Call of Duty tournament at the Dallas Convention Center. When the social media star SoaR Ashtronova tweeted about the confusion she felt as she fled the event beneath the whir of police helicopters, Barriss taunted her from one of his Twitter accounts: “It got ran, baby girl. Thats what happens.”

Six days later Barriss tweeted, “Gonna evacuate the net neutrality meeting guys don’t be upset.” That afternoon, the members of the Federal Communications Commission were compelled to scurry out of their Washington, DC, meeting room in response to a bomb threat, delaying a key vote on the future of net neutrality—an issue of vital importance to bandwidth-­hungry gamers. Barriss took credit for the incident on Twitter and also marveled at the lack of any law enforcement response. “Where the cops at?” he wrote. “I’m too godly.”
NerdPowerComplex  Swatting  Crime  Kids  Games  DGNI  nct  ncpin 
7 weeks ago by walt74
#BotSpot: Journalist’s Death Followed by Fake Accounts
Link: https://medium.com/dfrlab/botspot-journalists-death-followed-by-fake-accounts-e8ff7f1d23f1

This case study showed how a video by a source known for conspiracy was used on an international scale during a geopolitical event.

The video offered no concrete evidence, but it was still exploited by prominent Saudi social media influencers and bots to sow doubt in any culpability of Saudi government in Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance and death. The case also revealed the extent to which doubt and conspiracy has been used as a tool in prolonged denial of Khashoggi’s death. The denials of Khashoggi’s death are even further removed from the likelihood that the journalist and outspoken critic was killed for his criticism.

In any case, the bot accounts amplifying narratives cannot be taken as a serious source of evidence but have been used to promote suspicious content.
Journalism  HumanRights  FreeSpeech  Crime  SocialBots  DGNI  nct  ncpin  Conspiracy 
7 weeks ago by walt74
Russische Trolle in Deutschland: Per Twitter die öffentliche Meinung vergiften
Trotz alledem sind die Zahlen zur Reichweite insgesamt gering – zumindest was die nun enttarnten Accounts angeht. Zwischen 2014 und 2017 wurden die auf Deutsch verfassten Tweets insgesamt knapp 74.500 Mal von Nutzern geteilt, bei Likes kommen sie auf mehr als 120.000. Wie weit die oft sehr zugespitzten Inhalte öffentliche Diskussionen tatsächlich beeinflusst haben, dürfte niemand beurteilen können.

Noch einmal deutlich wird aber, dass man besonders in emotional geführten Diskussionen, etwa um den Umgang mit Flucht und Vertreibung, nicht sicher sein kann, ob hinter einer Äußerung in sozialen Medien eine bloße Meinungsäußerung oder ein ausländischer Manipulationsversuch steckt.


Die „Trolle“ sind also erfolgreich, da ihr Ziel nicht in der Manipulation einer einzigen Wahl in irgendeine Richtung ist (auch wenn das für Putin ein Nice-To-Have bedeutet), sondern die Destabilisierung des politischen öffentlichen Raums.

Link: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Russische-Trolle-twitterten-auf-Deutsch-als-normale-Nutzer-und-lokale-Boten-4200551.html
nct  ncpin  Russia  Trolls  DGNI 
7 weeks ago by walt74
Saudis’ Image Makers: A Troll Army and a Twitter Insider
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/20/us/politics/saudi-image-campaign-twitter.html?aggregates/dictators-friend-br-troll-farms-go-global

Mr. Khashoggi’s online attackers were part of a broad effort dictated by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and his close advisers to silence critics both inside Saudi Arabia and abroad. Hundreds of people work at a so-called troll farm in Riyadh to smother the voices of dissidents like Mr. Khashoggi. The vigorous push also appears to include the grooming — not previously reported — of a Saudi employee at Twitter whom Western intelligence officials suspected of spying on user accounts to help the Saudi leadership.
DGNI  nct  ncpin  FreeSpeech  Journalism  Crime  Trolls 
8 weeks ago by walt74
A Physics of Ideas: Measuring The Physical Properties of Memes
Gute Ausarbeitung einer „Ideenphysik“, also Memetik. Die meisten der hier aufgelisteten Eigenschaften sind explizit oder auf Umwegen bereits im gegenwärtigen Internet implementiert, als Analytics- und Sharing-Tools oder Werkzeuge für die interne Weiterverarbeitung von Daten bei Facebook et al. Man vergleiche diesen Satz hier zB mit FBs algorithmisch sortierten Feed: „We can then apply the above measurements to entire corpora (collections of documents). This enables us to empirically rank the ideas occurring in the corpus in any interval of time.“ Which is exactly what FB is doing.


Aus deren Zahlen könnte man sicher metaphysische Eigenschaften von einzelnen Ideen und Micro-Memes berechnen, deren Gültigkeit im Internet überprüfbar sind. Zum ursprünglichen Zeitpunkt dieses Artikels (2004, mit Updates 2010) war die Informationsdichte bei weitem nicht so hoch und der emotionale Affekt spielte im Gegensatz zu heute eine untergeordnete Rolle.

Link: http://www.novaspivack.com/science/a-physics-of-ideas-measuring-the-physical-properties-of-memes
Here are a set of basic measurements of the physical properties of memes and documents:

(Author’s Note, February 28, 2010: My latest thinking on this topic has evolved considerably from when this article was originally written in 2005. Instead of viewing memes as classical particles, I now think it is probably more accurate and useful to model them as physical waves or fields. At any given location (a media outlet, or a geographic place, or a person or document) every meme can be represented as a vector at any given time. In any case, regardless of the particular physical model we choose to map to memetics, the key point here is that it should be possible to make such a mapping from physics to memetics. This is a testable hypothesis. For example, select a certain mapping and generate some measurements about the higher order dynamics of memes, and then see if we can make testable predictions from those. Through such a process it should be possible to experimentally test and verify whatever mapping we choose, to find mappings that are most useful and accurate. Once we choose a mapping from physics to memetics that works, it could be an extraordinarily powerful tool for making sense of what is going on in the world, and particularly on the Web. I leave it to the physicists among us to come up the correct model, mappings, and experiments. In addition, since the original date of publication, social media has become an enormous playing field for memes and particularly rich source of data for measuring and mapping meme dynamics. In addition to documents we may also think of people and their lifestreams as sources of memetic data for measuring memes. Below is the original proposed mapping — which primarily was a classical physical model, focused on documents only.)

– Absolute meme mass = how “large” the meme is. There are various ways to come up with a measure of mass for memes and I don’t claim to have come up with the only, or even the best, way to do so. This is still a subject for further investigation. However, to begin, one approach at least is to interpret the mass as the total number of times a meme is mentioned in the corpus since the beginning of time to the present. However, it has been pointed out that this interpretation will cause the mass to increase over time. Still, it may be a useful interpretation, and in this paper I will use it provisionally. Another and perhaps better possibility, is to quantify the relative importance of particular memes in advance (for example by having analysts rate the terms that are most important to them) and to use these values as the mass of those memes. Note: When computing meme mass, we can choose to count repeat mentions or ignore them — doing so has slightly different effects on the algorithm. We can also, if we wish, get more fancy and look at clusters of memes (via semantic network indexing or entity extraction, for example) that relate to the same concepts in order to compute “concept-cluster momenta” but that is not required.

– Absolute meme velocity = how fast the meme is moving in the corpus in the present time interval = The rate of occurrences (or “mentions”) of the meme per unit time (minutes, hours, days, etc.) in a given time interval.

– Absolute meme momentum = the force or importance of the meme in the corpus = the meme’s absolute mass x the meme’s absolute velocity

– Relative meme mass = the mass of a meme within a subset of documents or data in the corpus representing some set of interests. (Note: we call a subset of mutually co-relevant documents a “reference frame” or a “context.”) such as a set of interests, a particular period in time, etc. (rather than in the entire corpus).

– Relative meme velocity = the velocity of a meme within a reference frame.

– Relative meme momentum = the relative meme mass X the relative meme velocity.

On the basis of these we can then compute derivatives such as:

– Absolute meme acceleration = how the absolute meme velocity is changing in the entire corpus = The change in absolute velocity per unit time of the meme in the corpus.

– Relative meme acceleration = the change in relative velocity of a meme.

– Absolute meme impulse = the change in importance per unit time = the change in a meme’s absolute momentum.

– Relative meme impulse = the change of a meme’s relative momentum.

Next, we use the above concepts to look at sets of memes, for example documents:

– Absolute document momentum = the force or importance of a document in the entire corpus = the sum of the absolute momenta of each meme that occurs in the document. (Note: we may choose to count or ignore repeat occurrences of an article in different locations or at different times — this has different effects).

– Relative document momentum = the force or importance of a document within a reference frame = the sum of the relative meme momenta in the document. This is a more contextually sensitive measure of document momentum — it couples momentum more tightly with a context, such as a particular query or time interval, or demographic segment. (Note: we may choose to count or ignore repeat occurrences of an article in different locations or at different times — this has different effects).

– Hybrid document momentum = a measure of momentum that combines both relative and absolute measurements = either relative mass X absolute velocity or absolute mass X relative velocity.
nct  ncpin  DGNI  Memetics 
9 weeks ago by walt74
Mehr Spaß mit Hass: Die grausame Logik der „Hater-Interviews“ auf Funk
Funk hätte nicht-anonyme Battle-Raps veranstalten sollen, in dem sich die Gehassten mit ihren Hassern Auge in Auge gegenseitig innerhalb eines strengen Regelkorsetts fertigmachen. Das wäre ehrlich gewesen.

Link: https://uebermedien.de/32162/mehr-spass-mit-hass-die-grausame-logik-der-hater-interviews-auf-funk/#scroll_to_steady_paywall
Die Beschimpfungen, die Beleidigungen, die Grenzüberschreitungen machen den Reiz dieser Show aus. Der Hass ist der Star.

Die Wohnzimmer-Zwillinge haben in der Verteidigung der Exsl95-Folge immer wieder darauf verwiesen, dass er sich – wie alle anderen auch – diesem Hass freiwillig ausgesetzt habe und wusste, was ihn erwartet. Das taugt aber nicht als Rechtfertigung für die Grenzüberschreitungen, denn betroffen ist hier nicht nur der Gast (der behauptet, er hätte den Spaß seines Lebens gehabt, aber vielleicht, angesichts seines öffentlichen Wirkens, wirklich nicht der beste Experte dafür ist, was gut für ihn ist). Betroffen sind auch die Zuschauer. Es geht nicht nur um Exsl95, es geht auch um andere, die aus dem hier gezeigten Umgang mit Hass lernen – Täter, Opfer, Schaulustige.

Das Format tut so, als wäre Hass – in der Exsl95-Folge konkret in Form von Body Shaming – unproblematisch, wenn das Opfer bloß souverän und selbstironisch mit ihm umgeht. Es verlagert die Verantwortung für Verletzungen von den Tätern auf die Opfer.
nct  ncpin  DGNI  Hatespeech  Kids  Youtube  Youth  Language 
9 weeks ago by walt74
Krieg der Wahr­heiten? Wissen­schaft im post­fak­ti­schen Zeit­alter
Sokal hatte später selber einge­standen, dass aus seiner Parodie „nicht viel gefol­gert werden kann. Sie beweist nicht, dass das ganze Feld der Kultur­wis­sen­schaften – und noch viel weniger jenes der Wissen­schafts­so­zio­logie – Nonsens sei.“ Auch belege sie nicht, dass die intel­lek­tu­ellen Stan­dards in diesen Feldern gene­rell lasch seien. Dasselbe gilt auch für ‘#SokalS­quared’. Dass eine Teil­menge der abge­feu­erten Papers ange­nommen wurde, sagt kaum etwas über die Rele­vanz des aufs Korn genom­menen Forschungs­be­reichs oder über die Qualität der darin aktiven Wissenschaftler*innen aus. Es wirft einzig ein Schlag­licht auf tatsäch­lich proble­ma­ti­sche Aspekte in der wissen­schaft­li­chen Publi­ka­ti­ons­praxis.


Link: https://geschichtedergegenwart.ch/krieg-der-wahrheiten-wissenschaft-im-postfaktischen-zeitalter/

Was Remo vergisst: Das steht, exakt genau so, im ursprünglichen Posting zum Hoax. Der Hoax möchte auf die „Konstruktion“ der „Wahrheit“ in den Genderstudies hinweisen, was von den Lehrenden dieser Fächer leider allzu oft vergessen wird und als „Wahrheit“ ihren Weg in die Legislation findet und dort allzuoft in autoritärem Duktus verteidigt wird, weil „Opfer“.

Und was sagt ein Text, der eine Aussage aus dem Hoax schlichtweg wiederholt und zum Gegenargument aufbauen möchte, über Postfaktizität? Von allen Seiten wurde alles gesagt und jetzt schließen wir den Kreis des Meinungsspektrums mit einem zitierenden Zirkelschluß? Irgendsowas wird es wohl sein.
nct  ncpin  DGNI  Hoax  Science  Feminism  PostTruth 
9 weeks ago by walt74
Stephen Elliott Sues Moira Donegan, Creator of Shitty Media Men List
„Stephen Elliott, a New Orleans–based writer is suing Moira Donegan, the creator of the Shitty Media Men List for libel and emotional distress. Elliott filed documents at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on October 10 and is seeking at least $1.5 million in damages.“

Good.

Links:
https://www.thecut.com/2018/10/stephen-elliott-sues-moira-donegan.html
https://quillette.com/2018/09/25/how-an-anonymous-accusation-derailed-my-life/

MeFi-Thread full of excuses and, indeed, victim-blaming: https://www.metafilter.com/177006/She-Says-He-Sues
Feminism  Media  Outrage  OutrageMemetics  DGNI  nct  ncpin 
9 weeks ago by walt74
Chantal Mouffe: Lob der Querfront
Neues Deutschland über Chantal Mouffes „Für einen linken Populismus“: https://www.neues-deutschland.de/artikel/1102509.aufstehen-lob-der-querfront.html
Das Jetzt unterscheidet sich erheblich von den 1920ern, als es kaum demokratische Sedimente gab; daher ist auch die Historie von Einheits- oder Volksfronten nur begrenzt instruktiv. Es stellt sich eine sehr heutige Frage: Haben wir so wenig Selbstvertrauen, dass wir jede Stellung räumen, die Rechte womöglich beanspruchen?

Ein Kardinalproblem linker Theorie wie Praxis ist nun die Frage nach dem »Wir«. Von der »Multitude« bis zum »Mosaik« reichen die - nicht sonderlich erfolgreichen - Versuche, die heute so fragmentierten Milieus von Widerständigkeit auf eine Art Nenner zu bringen. Mouffe sagt hierzu erstens, dass Politik mehr auf Affekt denn Wahrheit fußt - und empfiehlt einen Patriotismus des Egalitären als mobilisierende Figur: Das positive Gefühl - nennen wir es Stolz? -, das man etwa haben kann, wenn man Amerikanern von Unglaublichkeiten wie Elterngeld oder gebührenfreien Unis erzählt (bevor man einräumen muss, dass sich die soziale Schere dennoch sehr geöffnet hat). Zweitens lässt sich den Wir-Suchenden mit Mouffe - die sich hier zum Entsetzen der essenzialistischen Ideologiekritik auf den anderweitig natürlich hochproblematischen Carl Schmitt beruft - zurufen: Kümmert euch weniger um die Analyse des »Wir« als um die Bestimmung des Gegners, dann wird auch Ersteres leichter.
Left  nct  ncpin  Politics  Philosophy  Right  Nazis 
10 weeks ago by walt74
The Deliberate Awfulness of Social Media
The New Yorker reviews James Bridles Dark Ages: https://www.newyorker.com/books/under-review/the-deliberate-awfulness-of-social-media
Bridle argues that the Enlightenment-era equation of knowledge and power has collapsed under the sheer tonnage of information—data, news, opinion, political spectacle, fact, falsehood—mobilized by contemporary technology. Not only is knowledge no longer power, it isn’t even really knowledge anymore. It is a strange fact, verifiable by people still living, that the Internet was once thought of as a grand superstructure by which all of us would be elevated to a state of technological enlightenment. This is not how things have panned out. Here’s how Bridle puts it:

We find ourselves today connected to vast repositories of knowledge and yet we have not learned to think. In fact, the opposite is true: that which was intended to enlighten the world in practice darkens it. The abundance of information and the plurality of worldviews now accessible to us through the internet are not producing a coherent consensus reality, but one riven by fundamentalist insistence on simplistic narratives, conspiracy theories, and post-factual politics. It is on this contradiction that the idea of a new dark age turns: an age in which the value we have placed upon knowledge is destroyed by the abundance of that profitable commodity, and in which we look about ourselves in search of new ways to understand the world.

The book delineates the ways in which the future is becoming darker and less knowable, even as our tools for predicting it become more sophisticated. The book’s most fascinating and disturbing chapter is about how the Internet, the primary vector of information about climate change, is increasingly a vector of the problem itself. The world’s data centers already have roughly the same carbon footprint as the global aviation industry, even as people continue to speak of “the cloud” as though it were a barely corporeal entity. As temperatures rise, our information technologies will function less efficiently—increased heat and humidity will hamper the flow of wireless transmissions and satellite communications—and a vicious cycle will commence. (Bridle makes a similar point about cryptocurrency, that supposedly revolutionary and transformative technology: if its rate of growth continues, by next year Bitcoin alone will account for the same level of carbon output as the entire United States.) Even more depressing is the contention that climate change could actually wind up making us stupider: he cites research showing that human cognitive ability decreases significantly with higher atmospheric concentration of carbon. “Carbon dioxide clouds the mind: it directly degrades our ability to think clearly, and we are walling it into our places of education and pumping it into the atmosphere,” he writes. “The crisis of global warming is a crisis of the mind, a crisis of thought, a crisis in our ability to think another way to be. Soon, we shall not be able to think at all.”
Books  DGNI  nct  ncpin  SocialMedia 
10 weeks ago by walt74
"Wenn wir regieren, werdet ihr alle eingesperrt!" (Teil 2)
„Die zunehmende Kumpanei zwischen autoritären Staat und braunen Mob ist Ausdruck der rasch voranschreitenden Faschisierung der Bundesrepublik - Teil 2“

Link: https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Wenn-wir-regieren-werdet-ihr-alle-eingesperrt-4179281.html


Das einzige, was die protofaschistischen Deutschtümmler in den Amtsstuben davor abhält, ihren Durchmarsch an die Schalthebel der Macht zu vollenden, ist die gute, auf Pump laufende Weltkonjunktur samt der extremen Exportausrichtung der Bundesrepublik. BDI-Chef Dieter Kempf hat in einem Interview in den Machtkampf in der Koalition interveniert und klargestellt, dass Deutschlands Unternehmerschaft kein Interesse an nationalistischer Abschottung habe. Ein "angeblich heimatliebender Nationalismus, der gegen Zuwanderung und Freihandel mobilisiert", sei der falsche Weg und schade dem Exportweltmeister Deutschland. "In unserer Gesellschaft darf Fremdenhass keinen Platz haben", schlussfolgerte Kempf bei seinem Machtwort, der zugleich eine Konjunkturabkühlung in Deutschland aufgrund global zunehmender protektionistischer Tendenzen prognostizierte.

Die Zeit läuft ab. Sobald das ökonomische Kalkül, das den Neonationalismus zu einem "schlechten Geschäft" macht, beim nächsten Krisenschub zusammenbricht, wird sich der Wind auch in der Unternehmerschaft drehen.
Nazis  Right  Politics  nct  ncpin 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Von der Postdemokratie in den Vorfaschismus (Teil 1)
„Die zunehmende Kumpanei zwischen autoritärem Staat und braunem Mob ist Ausdruck der rasch voranschreitenden Faschisierung der Bundesrepublik Teil 1“

Link: https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Von-der-Postdemokratie-in-den-Vorfaschismus-4178644.html
Es sei ein "Trio Infernale" aus Innenminister, Bundespolizeichef und Verfassungsschutzpräsident, das die Bundesregierung mit immer neuen Provokationen und Eskalationen vor sich hertreibe. Angesichts der gegenwärtigen rechtsextremen Welle sei dies eine "brandgefährliche Konstellation".

Es ließe sich gar argumentieren, dass diese Kräfte im deutschen Staatsapparat die braune deutsche Welle aus machtpolitischem Kalkül bewusst fördern, um endlich die Machtfrage zu stellen. Die Tage Merkels sind gezählt, und die Antidemokraten und Protofaschisten der Neuen Deutschen Rechten im und außerhalb des Staatsapparates scharren schon mit den Hufen, um einen Elitenwechsel einzuleiten.

Die ausgehöhlte, aber formell noch gegebene neoliberale Postdemokratie, die Merkel personifiziert, sie droht in ein autoritäres präfaschistisches Regime überzugehen. Putin, Orban, Erdogan, Trump oder Kaczynski: Diese autoritären Regime sind keine anachronistischen Auslaufmodelle, sondern Zukunftsmodelle, die spätestens beim nächsten Krisenschub auch in Berlin auf der Tagesordnung stehen werden.
Nazis  Right  Politics  nct  ncpin 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Zur Zukunft des Lesens
Was gestern noch als bürgerliche Form ideologiegeleiteter Erkenntnis (nicht ganz zu Unrecht) kritisiert wurde, ist im heutigen gesellschaftlichen Umfeld nichts weniger als eine in jeder Hinsicht subversive kulturelle Praxis. Sie lässt uns für die Dauer der Lektüre aus dem Kreislauf der Waren und Vermarktung heraustreten, führt uns die Widersprüchlich- und Vieldeutigkeit sprachlich formulierter Wahrheitsbehauptungen vor Augen und lässt uns dadurch weit über den Rand des Textes hinaus in doppelter Form zur "Be-sinnung" kommen: als gemeinsame Anstrengung aller Sinne wie als sinnlich erfahrbare Erkenntnis.

Link: https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Zur-Zukunft-des-Lesens-4180496.html
Writing  Literature  nct  ncpin 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Ideology Is the Original Augmented Reality
lol Zizek :D http://mitp.nautil.us/feature/271/ideology-is-the-original-augmented-reality

The point of the parallel between Nazi anti-Semitism and Pokémon Go is thus a very simple and elementary one: Although Pokémon Go presents itself as something new, grounded in the latest technology, it relies on old ideological mechanisms. Ideology is the practice of augmenting reality.
nct  ncpin  AugmentedReality  VR  Tech  DGNI  Philosophy 
10 weeks ago by walt74
University of Manchester Students' Union bans clapping
If you hear this story, keep this in mind: Students Unions ≠ the University. Still, Jonathan Haidt is right, this clearly seems like the (literal) outcome of helicopter parenting.

Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-45717841
Reps at the University of Manchester voted to replace noisy appreciation with the British Sign Language (BSL) equivalent - a wave of both hands.

Union officer Sara Khan said traditional clapping can cause issues for students with autism, sensory issues or deafness.

But the move was criticised by some who accused students of being "pampered".

Under the new measures, BSL clapping will be used at student events such as debates, panels and talks.

Student groups and societies will also be encouraged to move away from audible clapping.
nct  ncpin  DGNI  CampusPolitics  Outrage 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Errichtet China eine Big-Data-Diktatur? Nein.
Link: https://www.republik.ch/2018/10/04/errichtet-china-die-erste-big-data-diktatur-des-21-jahrhunderts-nein
China steckt in einer Krise, glaubte schon früh die Regierung Xi Jinping. Es steckt in einer Krise der Werte: Zu viele Bürgerinnen interessierten sich nur noch für sich selbst und ihren ausschweifenden Konsum, Versprechen seien Lippenbekenntnisse, es grassiere der Egoismus. […] Das Ziel: In einer Gesellschaft des Misstrauens das Vertrauen mit den Mitteln des Staates wiederherstellen. Mit den Mitteln eines Sozialkreditsystems vor allem, das Gesetzestreue belohnt und abweichendes Verhalten sichtbar macht.

Dabei, so die Massgabe, sollen die Regierenden mit gutem Beispiel vorangehen: Politische Entscheidungen sollen transparent gemacht werden, Beamte besser ausgebildet werden, Funktionäre ihre Entscheidungen nicht mehr in Hinterzimmern auskungeln, sondern öffentlich begründen. Genau wie die Richter. Die Justiz, in ihrer uniformiert-militärischen Erscheinung äusserlich bisher eher dem Volksgerichtshof der Nazis ähnlich, soll effizienter und bürgernäher werden.

Der Begriff dafür klingt lyrisch: «Gesetzesvollzug im Sonnenschein.» Was auch heisst: Bislang geschah vieles bei Nacht und Nebel. Überhaupt sollen alle Regierungsorgane künftig «scheinen» – alles, was sie tun, soll mit Richtlinien und Gesetzesvorgaben begründet sein. Nur wer selbst Vertrauen vorlebe, könne auch Vertrauen von anderen verlangen. […]

Das Rezept für den Wandel: sozialer Kredit. Kredit heisst auf Chinesisch xinyong. Wörtlich kann man das übersetzen wie «Wende Vertrauen an!» Sozialkreditsystem tönt technisch und kalt. In China klingt der Begriff deutlich wärmer.
China  BigBrother  BigData  nct  ncpin  Tech 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Across the Arctic, lakes are leaking dangerous greenhouse gases. And one lake is behaving very strangely
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/arctic-lakes-are-bubbling-and-hissing-with-dangerous-greenhouse-gases/?noredirect=on
When the scientists examined samples of the gases, they found the chemical signature of a “geologic” origin. In other words, the methane venting from the lake seemed to be emerging not from the direct thawing of frozen Arctic soil, or permafrost, but rather from a reservoir of far older fossil fuels.

If that were happening all over the Arctic, Walter Anthony figured — if fossil fuels that had been buried for millennia were now being exposed to the atmosphere — the planet could be in even deeper peril.
nct  ncpin  Environment  Climate  Science 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship
Link: https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/
Something has gone wrong in the university—especially in certain fields within the humanities. Scholarship based less upon finding truth and more upon attending to social grievances has become firmly established, if not fully dominant, within these fields, and their scholars increasingly bully students, administrators, and other departments into adhering to their worldview. This worldview is not scientific, and it is not rigorous. For many, this problem has been growing increasingly obvious, but strong evidence has been lacking. For this reason, the three of us just spent a year working inside the scholarship we see as an intrinsic part of this problem. […]

What Did We Do?

We wrote 20 papers and submitted them to the best journals in the relevant fields (more on this below) with considerable success, even though we had to take the project public prematurely, and thus stop the study, before it could be properly concluded. […]

Many papers advocated highly dubious ethics including training men like dogs (“Dog Park”), punishing white male college students for historical slavery by asking them to sit in silence in the floor in chains during class and to be expected to learn from the discomfort (“Progressive Stack”), celebrating morbid obesity as a healthy life-choice (“Fat Bodybuilding”), treating privately conducted masturbation as a form of sexual violence against women (“Masturbation”), and programming superintelligent AI with irrational and ideological nonsense before letting it rule the world (“Feminist AI”). There was also considerable silliness including claiming to have tactfully inspected the genitals of slightly fewer than 10,000 dogs whilst interrogating owners as to their sexuality (“Dog Park”), becoming seemingly mystified about why heterosexual men are attracted to women (“Hooters”), insisting there is something to be learned about feminism by having four guys watch thousands of hours of hardcore pornography over the course of a year while repeatedly taking the Gender and Science Implicit Associations Test (“Porn”), expressing confusion over why people are more concerned about the genitalia others have when considering having sex with them (“CisNorm”), and recommending men anally self-penetrate in order to become less transphobic, more feminist, and more concerned about the horrors of rape culture (“Dildos”). None of this, except that Helen Wilson recorded one “dog rape per hour” at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon, raised so much as a single reviewer eyebrow, so far as their reports show. […]

Discussion […]

We managed to get seven shoddy, absurd, unethical and politically-biased papers into respectable journals in the fields of grievance studies. Does this show that academia is corrupt? Absolutely not. Does it show that all scholars and reviewers in humanities fields which study gender, race, sexuality and weight are corrupt? No. To claim either of those things would be to both overstate the significance of this project and miss its point. Some people will do this, and we would ask them not to. The majority of scholarship is sound and peer review is rigorous and it produces knowledge which benefits society.

Nevertheless, this does show that there is something to be concerned about within certain fields within the humanities which are encouraging of this kind of “scholarship.” We shouldn’t have been able to get any papers this terrible published in reputable journals, let alone seven. And these seven are the tip of the iceberg.
nct  ncpin  Feminism  Science  DGNI 
10 weeks ago by walt74
Social Media Is Making Us Dumber. Here’s Exhibit A.
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/opinion/social-media-dumber-steven-pinker.html

It’s getting harder and harder to talk about anything controversial online without every single utterance of an opinion immediately being caricatured by opportunistic outrage-mongers, at which point everyone, afraid to be caught exposed in the skirmish that’s about to break out, rushes for the safety of their ideological battlements, where they can safely scream out their righteousness in unison. In this case: “Steven Pinker said the alt-right is good! But the alt-right is bad! We must defend this principle!”

This is making us dumber.
OutrageMemetics  Outrage  DGNI  nct  ncpin  Journalism  Media 
10 weeks ago by walt74
How social media took us from Tahrir Square to Donald Trump
Link: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611806/how-social-media-took-us-from-tahrir-square-to-donald-trump/

Digital platforms allowed communities to gather and form in new ways, but they also dispersed existing communities, those that had watched the same TV news and read the same newspapers. Even living on the same street meant less when information was disseminated through algorithms designed to maximize revenue by keeping people glued to screens. It was a shift from a public, collective politics to a more private, scattered one, with political actors collecting more and more personal data to figure out how to push just the right buttons, person by person and out of sight.
nct  ncpin  DGNI  SocialMedia 
11 weeks ago by walt74
TAZ: Jugendliche in Ostdeutschland - Wir waren wie Brüder
„Unser Autor ist vor Neonazis weggelaufen und er war mit Rechten befreundet. In den Neunzigern in Ostdeutschland ging das zusammen. Und heute?“

Link: http://www.taz.de/!5536453/
Ich will nicht sterben, ich will nur in Ruhe gelassen werden. Ich schäme mich. Wir schämen uns alle. „Die neunziger Jahre sind in Ostdeutschland ein großes Tabu“, sagt Manja Präkels. „Diese Zeit ist mit großer Scham behaftet.“ Jeder hat seinen eigenen Grund dafür. Der eine wird gefeuert und findet nie wieder Arbeit, der nächste steht hinter der Gardine und freut sich heimlich, weil das Asylbewerberheim brennt und ich, ich bin eben ein Feigling.
nct  ncpin  Germany  DDR  Nazis  Youth 
11 weeks ago by walt74
«Die AfD plant den Staatsstreich» – eine Aussteigerin packt aus
Link: https://www.watson.ch/international/interview/512594501--die-afd-traegt-ganz-klar-zuege-einer-sekte-eine-aussteigerin-erzaehlt
Amazon: https://amzn.to/2P1DqW3
- Die AfD geriert sich als «grösste Oppositionspartei». Sie behaupten jetzt aber, die AfD habe einen grösseren Plan ...
- Es stimmt, nach aussen gibt sich die AfD als reine Oppositionspartei. Aber intern, innerhalb des Rechtsextremen-Flügels gibt es einen Plan, und der ist sehr beängstigend.

- Erklären Sie.
- Weil die AfD nie mit einer anderen Partei in der Regierung sein wird, stellt sich für sie die Frage, wie man Deutschland trotzdem verändern kann. Man landet dabei in einem ausserparlamentarischen, vorpolitischen Raum, genauer: bei der Identitären Bewegung. Die AfD versteht sich als einzig legitime Vertreterin dieses ausserparlamentarischen Raums und kann so die Themenhoheit nach Belieben bestimmen.

- Und dann?
- Man hofft, dass die Flüchtlingsfrage irgendwann so sehr eskaliert, dass ein bürgerkriegsähnlicher Zustand entsteht und man dieses Land putschartig übernehmen kann.
AFD  Nazis  Books  nct  ncpin  Politics  Right 
11 weeks ago by walt74
So is it nature not nurture after all?
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/sep/29/so-is-it-nature-not-nurture-after-all-genetics-robert-plomin-polygenic-testing


The big breakthrough in the past few years is polygenic testing, which is able to correlate multiple genes – often thousands – with behaviour differences. No one yet understands the complex relationships between different genes, but Plomin points out that this is not necessary for predictive purposes. Polygenic testing, he says, comes up with heritability estimates that correspond to a whole range of physical and psychological traits. The larger the study group, the more accurate the predictions – and, as more and more people have their genome mapped, the study groups are growing all the time.

“We’re explaining more variance in GCSE scores than you can predict with anything else, including parents’ educational level and socioeconomic status,” says Plomin.


Previously: https://nerdcore.de/2018/09/26/forget-nature-versus-nurture-nature-has-won/
nct  ncpin  Genetics  Psychology  Books  Biology 
11 weeks ago by walt74
Jörg Baberowski: «Der Mensch lässt sich nicht beliebig zurichten»
Link: https://www.nzz.ch/feuilleton/der-mensch-laesst-sich-nicht-beliebig-zurichten-ld.1419506
Heute bezeichnen Sie sich als liberal-konservativ. Warum?

Weil ich glaube, dass es nicht die Aufgabe des Staates ist, für das Glück oder die Perfektion der Bürger zu sorgen, sondern, einen Raum zu schaffen, in dem die Verschiedenen sich in der Kultur der höflichen Nichtbeachtung einrichten können. Von Möglichkeiten kann aber nur Gebrauch machen, wer geschützt ist, also in Anspruch nehmen kann, was er will. Die liberale Ordnung lebt von ihrer Erzwingbarkeit. Man kann überhaupt nicht liberal sein, ohne auch einzugestehen, dass Freiheit auf Voraussetzungen beruht. Es sollte den Staat nichts angehen, was seine Bürger denken oder wie sie ihr Leben einrichten. Aber er muss die Bedingungen so einrichten, dass die Bürger allen Widrigkeiten zum Trotz ihr Leben leben können.

Sie behaupten, Konservative hätten ein realistischeres Menschenbild als Linke. Wie kommen Sie darauf?

Die radikale Aufklärung ist die Emanzipation des Geistes von den Institutionen. Sie ist von der falschen Vorstellung beherrscht, dass der Mensch der Schöpfer seiner Welt sei und sie nach Belieben beherrschen könne. Der voraussetzungslose Mensch kann also tun und lassen, was er will, weil er vernunftbegabt ist und sich keiner letzten, unbegründeten Ordnung mehr unterwerfen muss.

Und diese Vorstellung ist falsch?

Ja. Denn solches Denken weiss nicht um die Gebundenheit der Existenz. Auch die Aufklärung steht auf einem Grund, von dem aus sie ihre Grundlosigkeit behauptet. Wenn man das eingesehen hat, dann wird man auch nicht mehr glauben, die Welt könne von nirgendwo betrachtet und nach Belieben verändert werden. Der Konservative hingegen schätzt Stil und Skepsis und nimmt hin, was er nicht verändern kann. Über manches sollte man einfach lachen. Denn am Ende sind wir alle tot.
nct  ncpin  Right  Politics  IdentityPolitics  Philosophy  Left 
11 weeks ago by walt74
Michael Bittner: Kunstblut und Wurzelsucher
Link: https://www.konkret-magazin.de/hefte/id-2018/heft-82018/articles/kunstblut-und-wurzelsucher.html
Statt Menschen nach ihren Worten oder Taten zu beurteilen, reden Linksidentitäre unablässig darüber, was Menschen tatsächlich oder vermeintlich »sind«. In immer mehr linken Diskursen sollen Hautfarbe, Geschlechtsneigung oder Alter die Argumente ersetzen. Die gesellschaftlichen Rollen werden der materiellen, historischen Analyse entzogen und zu Eigenschaften verabsolutiert. Wie unangenehm nah sich hier links- und rechtsidentitäres Denken kommen, muss kaum betont werden. Der Kampf gegen »kulturelle Aneignung« ist vom Kampf gegen Völkermischung nur schwer zu unterscheiden. Zusammen mit dem Wunsch, an die Stelle des Proletariats als revolutionäres Subjekt eine plurale Gemeinschaft progressiver Gruppen zu setzen, ergibt sich mancherorts die naive Vorstellung, die Linke sei die natürliche Vertretung der Frauen, der Schwarzen und der Homosexuellen, erst in zweiter Linie womöglich noch die der Vegetarier, Fahrradfahrer und Nichtraucher

Die Rechten, die zur Zeit in mancher Hinsicht leider geschickter agieren als ihre Gegner, haben Spaß daran, in dieser Lage ordentlich Verwirrung zu stiften. Sie wählen einfach eine Lesbe an die Spitze ihrer deutschvölkischen Partei oder schicken einen Schwarzen als Senator ins italienische Parlament. Auch Donald Trump beschäftigt natürlich in seinem Team Schwarze, Hispanics und Juden, die er bei Bedarf vor die Kamera schieben kann, um seine ehrliche Liebe zur Diversität zu beweisen. Solche Winkelzüge lassen all jene ratlos zurück, die eine politische Bewegung nicht auf Überzeugungen und Tätigkeiten, sondern auf Identitäten gründen wollen. Wie modern wirkt verglichen mit solchem Aberglauben im Gewand des Fortschritts die verlachte und abgetane Idee, in der Linken sollten sich alle versammeln, die für die Interessen der Menschen aller Farben und Formen eintreten.
Left  IdentityPolitics  Linksidentitäre  ncpin  nct  Politics 
11 weeks ago by walt74
How France created the metric system
Link: http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20180923-how-france-created-the-metric-system
We don’t generally notice measurement because it’s pretty much the same everywhere we go. Today, the metric system, which was created in France, is the official system of measurement for every country in the world except three: the United States, Liberia and Myanmar, also known as Burma. And even then, the metric system is still used for purposes such as global trade. But imagine a world where every time you travelled you had to use different conversions for measurements, as we do for currency. This was the case before the French Revolution in the late 18th Century, where weights and measures varied not only from nation to nation, but also within nations. In France alone, it was estimated at that time that at least 250,000 different units of weights and measures were in use during the Ancien Régime.
MetricSystem  Units  Physics  Science  nct  ncpin 
11 weeks ago by walt74
'We're moving to higher ground': America's era of climate mass migration is here
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/americas-era-of-climate-mass-migration-is-here
By the end of this century, sea level rise alone could displace 13 million people, according to one study, including 6 million in Florida. States including Louisiana, California, New York and New Jersey will also have to grapple with hordes of residents seeking dry ground. […]

Within just a few decades, hundreds of thousands of homes on US coasts will be chronically flooded. By the end of the century, 6ft of sea level rise would redraw the coastline with familiar parts – such as southern Florida, chunks of North Carolina and Virginia, much of Boston, all but a sliver of New Orleans – missing. Warming temperatures will fuel monstrous hurricanes – like the devastating triumvirate of Irma, Maria and Harvey in 2017, followed by Florence this year – that will scatter survivors in jarring, uncertain ways.

The projections are starting to materialize in parts of the US, forming the contours of the climate migration to come.

“I don’t see the slightest evidence that anyone is seriously thinking about what to do with the future climate refugee stream,” said Orrin Pilkey, professor emeritus of coastal geology at Duke University. “It boggles the mind to see crowds of climate refugees arriving in town and looking for work and food.”
nct  ncpin  Climate  Environment  Immigration  USA 
11 weeks ago by walt74
"Diese Körper sind von Angst erfüllt" - Interview mit Klaus Theweleit über aktuelle Gewalt in Deutschland
Link: https://lisa.gerda-henkel-stiftung.de/maennergewalt_theweleit
Prof. Theweleit: Ein Grundfehler der liberalen „bürgerlichen“ Presse war (und ist) es meiner Meinung nach, den Vorwurf der „Lügenpresse“ nicht wirklich ernst zu nehmen, ihn nicht ernsthaft zu bedenken. Statt zu sagen – was der Wahrheit entspräche – wir sind parteiisch; wir vertreten bestimmte Interessen; und wir können das begründen: zum Beispiel das Interesse an der sogenannten Marktwirtschaft in hochtechnifizierten demokratischen Gesellschaften. Wir können begründen, warum dazu das Interesse an bestimmten Formen der politischen Auseinandersetzung gehört: im Bundestag, in den Landtagen, in den Kommunen, in Kindergärten, Schulen, in Betrieben und Vereinen. Wir können begründen, warum dazu die Akzeptanz des Gewaltmonopols des Staats gehört; die Akzeptanz der sogenannten „Gewaltenteilung“, Unabhängigkeit der Justiz. Aber auch das Recht auf Bürgerinitiativen, auf zivilen Widerstand etc. - aber nicht das Recht auf lokale „Bürgerwehren“, zumal bewaffnete, um nur dies eine Beispiel zu nennen.

Zuzugeben wäre also: „Wir sind eine interessenzentrierte bürgerliche Presse mit ganz bestimmten Werten; und sind damit in den Augen derer, die diese Werte ablehnen und bekämpfen ganz selbstverständlich Lügenpresse. Danke für das Kompliment“! – so etwa hätte eine angemessene Antwort zu lauten; und nicht: die offen Kriminellen von AfD und ähnlich einzuladen in sogenannte Talkshows, um ihnen dort zu beweisen, dass man doch nicht Lügenpresse sei, sondern objektiver Journalismus; diese Zentrallüge der „bürgerlichen Presse“ also weiter und nochmals zu verbreiten. Man hätte sich zu bekennen zur eigenen Parteilichkeit. Nämlich: „Ja, wir sind so; und wir sind gegen euch. Und wir sagen das laut, auch ohne euch dabei haben zu müssen im Diskutierstuhl“. Weil: „Ihr seid erklärte Feinde jenes demokratischen Systems, dessen Formate wir hier diskutativ repräsentieren. Und da gehört ihr nicht rein“.

Stattdessen die Mär vom „objektiven Journalismus“. Ich (wie Millionen andere) müssten Schmerzensgeld verlangen dürfen für die Leiden des Fremdschämens, die uns die ModerateurInnen Maischberger, Will, Illner, Jauch, Plasberg auferlegt haben in ihren devoten „Gesprächsversuchen“ mit den offen kriminellen Typen, männlich wie weiblich, aus der sogenannten Alternative fD. […]

L.I.S.A.: In vielen Kommentaren zu den Auswirkungen solcher Ereignisse wie der in Chemnitz und ähnlicher wird die Sorge vor einer Rückkehr des Faschismus in Deutschland ausgedrückt. Halten Sie diese Sorge für berechtigt? Oder haben wir es hier mit einer überschaubaren Größe von faschistischen Tendenzen zu tun? Und was ist mit den sogenannten "besorgten Bürgern", die am Rande stehen und applaudieren, wenn auf Kundgebungen mit Blick auf Flüchtende Parolen wie "Absaufen!" skandiert werden?

Prof. Theweleit: Ich habe mehrfach betont: „Besorgte Bürger“ werden keine Faschisten; werden kein Mob und keine Menschenjäger. Und sie skandieren nicht „Absaufen“. Die Bezeichnung „Sorge“ gehört hier nicht her. Wir haben es, wie Sie sagen, mit einer „überschaubaren Größe von faschistischen Tendenzen“ zu tun; keineswegs harmlose. Aber: Woher diese merkwürdige Tendenz in „unseren“ Medien, die Bedrohungen durch diese Gefahr mutwillig zu vergrößern? Am Sonntag Abend, 10. September 2018, wird in Kurzmeldungen und Teletexten ein „Sieg der Rechtspopulisten“ in den schwedischen Parlamentswahlen vermeldet; in Teilen der Montagspresse auch. Am Dienstag dann die Korrektur: 17,6%; nur drittstärkste Partei. Keine Chance, an einer Regierungsbildung beteiligt zu werden. (Ähnlich vor einiger Zeit die flächendeckend beschworenen Bedrohungen durch Frau LePen in Frankreich). Liberale Journalisten schreiben eine faschistische Bedrohung hoch, an die sie (wahrscheinlich) selber nicht glauben. Was für ein merkwürdiges Vergnügen. Das Spiegel-Cover vom 8. September zeigt das Personal der AfD-Spitze in einem himmelfahrtsartigen Aufstieg begriffen. What for? Was soll der Blödsinn? Keineswegs ist „Europa“, keineswegs ist „Deutschland“ von einer Vorherrschaft des Rechtspopulismus bedroht. Bullshit!
Interview  Nazis  DGNI  nct  ncpin  Media  Journalism 
11 weeks ago by walt74
Alternative Influence – Broadcasting the Reactionary Right on YouTube
Mittelbrauchbarer Bericht über lose Verbindungen der prominenteren Culture-Wars-Youtube-Community von Poole bis Molyneux. Vor allem als Übersicht über den (nach wie vor ausbaufähigen) Kenntnisstand des linken Mainstreams interessant.

<a href="https://datasociety.net/output/alternative-influence/">Alternative Influence – Broadcasting the Reactionary Right on YouTube</a>
PDF: https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/DS_Alternative_Influence.pdf

New Data & Society report Alternative Influence: Broadcasting the Reactionary Right on YouTube by Researcher Rebecca Lewis presents data from approximately 65 political influencers across 81 channels to identify the “Alternative Influence Network (AIN)”; an alternative media system that adopts the techniques of brand influencers to build audiences and “sell” them political ideology.

Alternative Influence offers insights into the connection between influence, amplification, monetization, and radicalization at a time when platform companies struggle to handle policies and standards for extremist influencers. The network of scholars, media pundits, and internet celebrities that Lewis identifies leverages YouTube to promote a range of political positions, from mainstream versions of libertarianism and conservatism, all the way to overt white nationalism.

Notably, YouTube is a principal online news source for young people.1 Which is why it is concerning that YouTube, a subsidiary of Google, has become the single most important hub by which an extensive network of far-right influencers profit from broadcasting propaganda to young viewers.

“Social networking between influencers makes it easy for audience members to be incrementally exposed to, and come to trust, ever more extremist political positions,” writes Lewis, who outlines how YouTube incentivizes their behavior. Lewis illustrates common techniques that these far-right influencers use to make money as they cultivate alternative social identities and use production value to increase their appeal as countercultural social underdogs. The report offers a data visualization of this network to show how connected influencers act as a conduit for viewership.
ncpin  nct  DGNI  Youtube  Media 
11 weeks ago by walt74
Forget Nature Versus Nurture. Nature Has Won
Social Constructivists can fuck off I guess.

Link: https://quillette.com/2018/09/25/forget-nature-versus-nurture-nature-has-won/
In Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are Robert Plomin makes the case that genetic differences cause most variation in psychological traits – things like personality and cognitive abilities. The way your parents raise you, the schools you attend – they don’t have much effect on those traits. Children are similar to their parents, but that similarity is due to shared genetics, rather than shared family environment.

Obviously the thoughts in your head, the facts you know, are not the same as your great-great-grand-father’s – we learn those things. But how easily you learn those facts, how well you remember them, how optimistic or pessimistic you are – those are largely set by your genes. Almost every psychological trait has significant heritability, even political leanings. To a significant degree, you’re either born a little Liberal or else a little Conservative, to quote Gilbert and Sullivan.

And to the extent that your personality is not set by your genes, it’s apparently influenced by poorly-understood random factors, rather than your upbringing or social circumstances. […]

Plomin has done important work, and is a leader in the field, but many people are involved – so many that Plomin says he can no longer keep up with all the papers being produced. But suffice to say the book’s thesis is not eccentric and has not been contradicted by any new research: it is representative of the field as a whole.

Assuming that this work is correct, what does it mean? What are the implications?

It means that we have to completely rethink and rebuild the social sciences. Steven Pinker said: “For most of the twentieth century it was assumed that psychological traits were caused by environmental factors, called nurture.” This was completely wrong. Problems like p-value fishing and the current ‘replication crisis’ are nothing compared to the tsunami that’s coming.
Books  DGNI  Psychology  nct  ncpin  Biology 
11 weeks ago by walt74
Die rechten Hipster aus dem Pott
Link: https://correctiv.org/blog/ruhr/artikel/2018/08/16/die-rechten-hipster-aus-dem-pott/
Die Identitäre Bewegung ist die Jugendorganisation der Neuen Rechten in Europa – straff organisiert mit intellektuell verpacktem Rassismus. In Deutschland werden die Identitären vom Verfassungsschutz beobachtet. In NRW sind sie stark vertreten. Die Ortsgruppe in Bochum gilt als besonders aktiv. Unsere Reporterin hat sich als Anwärterin mit ihnen getroffen. Eine Undercover-Reportage. [...]

Frank erzählt stolz, er sei schnell aufgestiegen. Jeder wolle jetzt etwas von ihm. Es tue gut, gebraucht zu werden. Damals in der Schule, da hätten sie ihn wegen seiner schwarzen Klamotten und dem Kajal um die Augen immer komisch angeschaut. Wegen seines Gothic-Looks hätten ihn immer die Ausländer tyrannisiert, erzählt er. Auch heute geht er noch auf Gothic-Treffen. Er sei schon immer eher alternativ gewesen, sagt Frank. „Deshalb bin ich auch ein gutes Gesicht, damit die Leute nicht sofort „Nazi” denken.” Jetzt unter seinen „Patrioten” sei er wer.

Frank erzählt mir von den Regeln der Identitären: Kommuniziert würde nur über den Messenger Threema, das könne nicht abgehört werden. Alle Chats würden nach 30 Tagen gelöscht. Zu speziellen Treffen würden Handys in einem anderen Raum gelassen. „Die können ja jederzeit mithören.” Frank hebt sein Handy zwischen uns. „Hallo Verfassungsschutz”, sagt er.
Nazis  DGNI  IB  Right  nct  ncpin 
august 2018 by walt74
Why Facebook is losing the war on hate speech in Myanmar
Reuters found more than 1,000 examples of posts, comments and pornographic images attacking the Rohingya and other Muslims on Facebook. A secretive operation set up by the social media giant to combat the hate speech is failing to end the problem.

Link: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/myanmar-facebook-hate/
DGNI  ncpin  nct  Facebook  Hatespeech  Violence  Fake  FakeNews 
august 2018 by walt74
Vive la Difference
Die Unter­schiede könnten nicht grösser sein: Während es Deleuze um ein liber­täres „Gewimmel von Diffe­renzen, einen Plura­lismus von freien, wilden oder unge­zähmten Diffe­renzen“ ging, will Benoist „dem Chaos eine Form aufzwingen”. Diese Form werde erreicht, indem sich Menschen diffe­ren­zieren und in „Unter-Mensch oder Über-Mensch” sortieren lassen. Benoist kämpft gegen eine Idee des Welt­frie­dens, in dem er ein „Ideal der Wider­spruchs­lo­sig­keit” erkennt, „das zwangs­läufig die Aufhe­bung der Unter­schiede [diffé­rences] in sich schließt”. Er will den Kampf, der Diffe­renzen und Ordnungen herstellt, er will einen „Konflikt der Gegen­sätze”, der Gewinner und Verlierer kennt; sein Denken ähnelt auch darin dem neoli­be­ralen Dogma der konkur­renz­ge­bun­denen Frei­heit des Marktes.
ncpin  PostModernism  Left  nct  Right  Philosophy 
august 2018 by walt74
The web’s transition from nomadism to feudalism
Over the past 25 years, the web appears to have transitioned from a primarily nomadic culture to a mostly agrarian one, mirroring the Neolithic Revolution 10,000 years ago.

The simplicity of HTML-only site building, spaces like Geocities & Angelfire, and cultural artifacts such as web rings coupled with poor search engine tech saw us navigate the web like nomads: from point to point, link to link.

The web has developed & so have the skills necessary to build within it. HTML was easy. CSS took a little more time & JS more again, alienating most and establishing a class hierarchy. Discovery was solved, weakening point-to-point navigation.

The literate Priesthood can still build & interface with the web, but the vast majority of people are relegated to the peasantry. “Fortunately” for them, motivated benefactors have offered a Faustian bargain to make their lives “easier”.

Corporate Feudalism has emerged to create centralized, “safe” spaces for the peasantry to work & play. Attention is farmed and sold in exchange for convenience, protection, mediated self-expression & an indifferent audience. You can do anything if it’s within their borders.


Link: https://kottke.org/18/07/the-webs-transition-from-nomadism-to-feudalism
Internet  nct  ncpin  Tech  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Postmodernism vs. The Pomoid Cluster
“Postmodernism” is used by its critics as a label for a set of ideas and attitudes which bear a family resemblance both to each other and to postmodernism proper. Its use is strikingly similar to that of other bogeymen-words like, “patriarchy” and “capitalism,” in that it is not one big phenomenon, but many small ones in a trenchcoat.

In my experience, the list of what is being referred to under the name “postmodernism” looks something like this:

- Activist scholarship that’s more concerned with advocacy than knowledge.
- The idea that it’s okay to be as political and biased as you want because everything is political anyway.
- Public debate is a war of ideas and non-rational means are acceptable. Indeed, insisting on rational rules and objective standards is nothing but an attempt to gain the upper hand.
- The attitude that science, rationality, and logic hold no special status as means of inquiry, often backed up by describing them as male, white, and western, in contradiction to their professed universality.
- Identity politics as defined here: i.e. the idea that oppressed groups are owed agreement with their views due to past and present injustices, backed by the notion that effective communication and rational discussion across identity lines are impossible.
- Favoring subjectivity and intuition over objectivity and evidence.
- Favoring ideas over the physical when thinking about what constitutes reality.
- Everything is about power. For example, scientific facts are the outcome of social processes and reflects the biases of the winners, not actual truth.
- The structure of society is not a given and arguments justifying the status quo are simply the ruling groups’ attempts to justify their privileges.
- Things are “socially constructed,” which can mean many things, but usually implies that the categorization/conceptualization of people, events, or contexts creates corresponding behaviors, rather than those behaviors being innate.
- Cultural and ideological forces, not material limitations or human nature, cause social problems.
- There is no “human nature” worth considering.
- Individual wants are mediated by culture to such an extent that they can be viewed as untrustworthy.
- A focus on relationships as more fundamental than entities.
- An unwillingness to pass judgment on cultural practices, often inconsistently applied only to cultures considered oppressed.
- Rigid labeling, especially of people, is illegitimate. It’s desirable to disrupt and destabilize categories, boundaries and roles.
- Subjective interpretations of experiences and communication are always correct. Intent does not determine meaning.
- People’s own view of themselves is more important than their objective characteristics.
- The political and social implications of ideas are more important and interesting than their accuracy or parsimony.
- Image and appearances are more important than substance.
- It’s valid to criticize scientific ideas ideologically, even if you have no particular scientific objections to offer.
- No culture is better than any other. This often includes the hypocritical exception of western civilization, which is bad.
PostModernism  Philosophy  nct  ncpin  JordanPeterson  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Cultural Appropriation and the Children of ‘Shōgun’
During much of the twentieth century, white American authors produced some excellent novels featuring Native American characters. The list includes masterpieces such as Oliver La Farge’s Pulitzer Prize-winning Laughing Boy (1929) and Scott O’Dell’s Newbery Medal-winning Island of the Blue Dolphins (1960). Other prominent titles in the genre include Thomas Berger’s 1964 novel Little Big Man (subsequently adapted into a film starring Dustin Hoffman and Faye Dunaway directed by Arthur Penn), Margaret Craven’s I Heard the Owl Call My Name (1967), and Douglas C. Jones’s A Creek Called Wounded Knee (1978).

But the production of such novels has dwindled markedly over the last 40 years or so. This probably has something to do with what happened to Ruth Beebe Hill after the publication of her 1978 novel Hanta Yo. The early reviews of the book were positive. A reviewer for the Harvard Crimson called Hanta Yo “the best researched novel yet written about an American Indian tribe.” Native American author N. Scott Momaday, author of House Made of Dawn, admired the book. David Wolper, the producer of the landmark TV miniseries Roots purchased the film rights to Hanta Yo and planned to give it the same treatment as Roots. Alas, before Wolper could put his plan into action, the book began drawing criticism from Native American groups contending that it was an inaccurate portrayal of the Sioux. A 1980 article in People magazine summarized the controversy like this:

A $2 million class-action suit, filed on behalf of the Sioux people, claims that Hill’s sweeping novel set at the turn of the eighteenth century is demeaning to the Plains Indians. The litigation seeks further to block production of any TV show based on Hanta Yo. Sioux activists have also tried to force the work out of bookstores and libraries and have picketed the author on the lecture circuit, waving signs like HILL HAS A TONTO COMPLEX.

Hill strongly defended her book against the attacks. The article in People points out that she spent nearly 30 years researching the novel and consulted more 700 Indians during that period. Nonetheless, the damage was done. The TV miniseries was never made and the book soon drifted out of print. Although Hill lived to be 102, she would never write another novel. No other white novelist has published a novel about American Indian life anywhere near as ambitious as Hanta Yo in the years since. No doubt the fear of being publicly shamed for ‘cultural appropriation’ has had something to do with it.

More recently, author Laura Moriarty triggered a firestorm when she included an American Muslim character in her young-adult novel American Heart (2018). Because the book’s main character was a white girl, Moriarty was accused of exploiting a ‘white savior’ narrative. According to Ruth Graham of Slate magazine, even before the book was published, it had…

…already attracted the ire of the fierce group of online YA readers that journalist Kat Rosenfield has referred to as ‘culture cops.’ To them, it was an irredeemable problem that Moriarty’s novel, which was inspired in part by Huckleberry Finn, centers on a white teenager who gradually—too gradually—comes to terms with the racism around her. On Goodreads, the book’s top ‘community review,’ posted in September, begins, “fuck your white savior narratives”; other early commenters on Goodreads accused Moriarty of “profiting off people’s pain” and said “a white writer should not have tackled this story, and neither should a white character be the center of it.”

The outcry surrounding Moriarty’s book was so intense that Kirkus took the unprecedented step of removing a positive review of American Heart from its website, even though the review had been written by a Muslim woman who is an authority on young-adult literature.

In the midst of such a cultural moment, few white writers are likely to undertake the tremendous amount of research required to produce a book like Shōgun or Shanghai or Jade knowing that a hostile reception will almost certainly be awaiting them and their novel when (and if) it finally sees the light of day. If you haven’t yet experienced the joys of exploring ‘The Children of Shogun,’ a great literary pleasure still awaits you. But read slowly and linger over each book. No more than a few dozen excellent examples were ever published. And no new titles are likely to appear in the foreseeable future, if Celeste Ng and her ilk have their way.


Link: https://quillette.com/2018/07/30/cultural-appropriation-and-the-children-of-shogun/
CulturalAppropriation  nct  ncpin  Literature  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Soziale Kontrolle 4.0? Chinas Social Credit Systems | Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik
Link: https://www.blaetter.de/archiv/jahrgaenge/2018/juli/soziale-kontrolle-4.0-chinas-social-credit-systems
bei den chinesischen Scoring-Systemen handelt es sich um eine technologische Überwachung, an der privatwirtschaftliche und staatliche Akteure gleichermaßen beteiligt sind. Zugleich zeichnen sich die SCS – anders als Orwells „Großer Bruder“ – durch partizipativ-spielerische Elemente und damit durch eine weitaus größere Freiwilligkeit und Eingebundenheit seitens der Observierten aus.

Eine Schlüsselrolle kommt dabei der sogenannten Gamification zu, eine Technik, die im Rahmen der Entwicklung von Computerspielen eine wichtige Rolle spielt. Sie verfolgt das Ziel, die Aufmerksamkeit der Spielerinnen und Spieler möglichst lange zu binden und zugleich positive Emotionen gegenüber dem Spiel zu erzeugen. Heute wird Gamification in nahezu allen gesellschaftlichen Bereichen eingesetzt – nicht zuletzt im Militär sowie in der Unternehmensführung und der Werbung.

Zur Motivation gibt es im SCS nicht nur Punktezahlen, sondern auch verschiedene Level und sogenannte Mini-Spiele. Der Punktestand erlaubt es, dass sich alle miteinander vergleichen können, was zugleich dazu anspornt, den eigenen Punktestand fortwährend zu erhöhen. Schon die Aussicht, bei einer geringen Punktezahl kleine Belohnungen zu erhalten, motiviert Menschen zur Teilnahme – wie hierzulande die große Verbreitung des Payback-Bonusprogramms zeigt. […]

Obwohl Formen spielerischer Überwachung keineswegs nur in Fernost, sondern auch im Westen angewandt werden, treffen Berichte über das chinesische SCS hierzulande meist auf großes Befremden. Dies zeigt zum einen, dass es noch immer große Vorurteile gegenüber China gibt, zum anderen aber auch, wie unkritisch Digitalisierungsprozesse in unserem Teil der Welt wahrgenommen werden. […]

Die ständige Vergleichbarkeit und Bewertung führt dabei auch im Westen zur stetigen Auflösung der Privatsphäre sowie einer Kultur der Konformität im privaten und der zunehmenden Risikovermeidung im professionellen Bereich.
nct  ncpin  BigBrother  China  SocialControlSystem  Privacy  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Mark Zuckerberg defends Rights of Holocaust-Deniers
Zuckerberg will Holocaust-Leugnung nicht löschen und offenbart damit eins der Kern-Dilemma der modernen Welt: FB ist eine globale Plattform, die nach lokalen Gesetzen funktioniert und dennoch globalen Impact innehat, die die lokalen Gesetze ad absurdum führen, grade und vor allem bei Publishing/Sprache. Ein Widerspruch in sich, offengelegt am maximal schrecklichsten Beispiel.

For future reference:

Link: https://www.recode.net/2018/7/18/17588116/mark-zuckerberg-clarifies-holocaust-denial-offensive
Link: https://www.recode.net/2018/7/18/17575156/mark-zuckerberg-interview-facebook-recode-kara-swisher
I’m Jewish, and there’s a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened.

I find that deeply offensive. But at the end of the day, I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong. I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong, but I think-

<em>In the case of the Holocaust deniers, they might be, but go ahead.</em>

It’s hard to impugn intent and to understand the intent. I just think, as abhorrent as some of those examples are, I think the reality is also that I get things wrong when I speak publicly. I’m sure you do. I’m sure a lot of leaders and public figures we respect do too, and I just don’t think that it is the right thing to say, “We’re going to take someone off the platform if they get things wrong, even multiple times.” (Update: Mark has clarified these remarks here: “I personally find Holocaust denial deeply offensive, and I absolutely didn’t intend to defend the intent of people who deny that.”)

What we will do is we’ll say, “Okay, you have your page, and if you’re not trying to organize harm against someone, or attacking someone, then you can put up that content on your page, even if people might disagree with it or find it offensive.” But that doesn’t mean that we have a responsibility to make it widely distributed in News Feed. I think we, actually, to the contrary-

<em>So you move them down? Versus, in Myanmar, where you remove it?</em>

Yes.

<em>Can I ask you that, specifically about Myanmar? How did you feel about those killings and the blame that some people put on Facebook? Do you feel responsible for those deaths?</em>

I think that we have a responsibility to be doing more there.

<em>I want to know how you felt.</em>

Yes, I think that there’s a terrible situation where there’s underlying sectarian violence and intention. It is clearly the responsibility of all of the players who were involved there. So, the government, civil society, the different folks who were involved, and I think that we have an important role, given the platform, that we play, so we need to make sure that we do what we need to.
nct  ncpin  Nazis  Holocaust  Facebook  FreeSpeech  HateSpeech  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Bruno Latours Terrestrisches Manifest: Mit Gaia in die Apokalypse
Link: https://shocknawe.hypotheses.org/746
[Bruno Latour] gilt als Mitbegründer der Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie (ANT), die besagt, dass an jeder Handlung ein Netzwerk zahlreicher AkteurInnen beteiligt sei. Der Akteur-Status beschränkt sich dabei nicht auf menschliche Individuen. Vielmehr schreibt die ANT auch anderen Organismen und Dingen eine ihnen eigene Form der «Agency» zu – d. h. eine ihnen eigen Handlungs-, oder besser: Wirkmacht.

Auf Gaia übertragen: Nicht mehr allein der Mensch hat die Möglichkeit, die «Natur» nach seinen Bedürfnissen zu gestalten. Alle anderen Lebewesen beeinflussen und verändern ebenfalls die Bedingungen des eigenen Lebens. Sie bilden dabei mit der unbelebten «Natur» ein komplexes und dynamisches Geflecht von Ursachen und Wirkungen. Die sogenannte «kritische Zone», der dünne belebte «Biofilm» um den Erdball agiert als Netzwerk, in das der Mensch eingebunden ist und in dem er mitwirkt.

Ist das Anthropozän Geschichte?

Zuletzt tat dies der Mensch so massgebend, dass ihm ein Erdzeitalter gewidmet werden soll: das Anthropozän. So forderte es eine Arbeitsgruppe am 35. Geologenkongress im August 2016 in Kapstadt und schlug vor, das Anthropozän an einem sogenannten «Goldenen Spike» in der Mitte des 20. Jahrhunderts anzusetzen. Denn ab jenem Punkt beginnt sich die Sedimentzusammensetzung der Erde massiv zu verändern. Zu den zentralen Einflussfaktoren gehören oberirdische Atombombentests und die sogenannte «grosse Beschleunigung», in der nicht nur das Bevölkerungswachstum explodiert, sondern im Zuge des Wirtschaftswunders auch der Einsatz von Kohle und Erdöl, von Plastik und Beton.

Es mehren sich indes Stimmen, die behaupten, die Epoche des Anthropozäns sei bereits Geschichte (vgl. «Alle Kritter sollen gedeihen» in derselben Ausgabe der Wochenzeitung ). Der neuseeländische Umwelthistoriker Paul Star etwa verwies jüngst darauf, dass die Effekte des menschgemachten Klimawandels längst ausser Kontrolle geraten seien. Angesichts der sich ankündigenden Umwälzungen sei es vermessen zu behaupten, der Mensch habe noch einen dominanten Einfluss auf die von ihm entfesselte Dynamik.

Als Akteur-Netzwerk-Theoretiker stimmt Latour dieser Kritik zwar zu: Die Menschen sähen sich als Hauptakteure des Anthropozäns «mit einer Rolle betraut, die viel zu gross für sie ist». Als Praktiker sieht er aber auch den realpolitischen Nutzen des Begriffs. «Fragen der Verantwortung und der Umweltethik werden vom Begriff des Anthropozäns vollkommen transformiert», sagte er in einem Interview mit der Los Angeles Review of Books. Das Anthropozän biete im Grunde einen Alternativbegriff zur – gescheiterten – Idee der Moderne.[1]

Où atterir? – wo landen? Ein Raum für Fragen statt für Antworten.

Dass Latour kaum Berührungsängste kennt, demonstriert er mit teils gewagten Hypothesen in seinem «terrestrischem Manifest». Etwa auf jener, die er zu einer Titanic-Metapher zuspitzt: die führenden Eliten hätten längst begriffen, dass das Schiff untergehen wird. Nun forderten sie das Orchester auf, Schlummerlieder zu spielen, als Ablenkung um sich heimlich die Rettungsboote schnappen und sich damit abzusetzen zu können.
nct  ncpin  Climate  Globalisierung  Refugees  Philosophy  Environment 
july 2018 by walt74
Ich habe Flüchtlinge aus dem Meer gerettet - Glaubt nicht den Lügen der AfD
Ein paar sehr interessante Details zur Seenotrettung von Flüchtenden, die sich grade die Kritiker (ich bin einer davon, wenn auch in der Light-Variante mit Fokus auf Menschenrechte) ganz genau durchlesen sollten..

Link: https://www.volksverpetzer.de/gastkommentar/mittelmeer-retten/
BEHAUPTUNG 3: WIR BRINGEN DIE „MIGRANTEN“ NACH EUROPA
Richtig. Aber: Wir wollen das nicht und wir wollten das auch nie. Die EU hat uns dazu jedoch verpflichtet. Wir mussten den sogenannten Code of Conduct unterzeichnen, welcher besagt, dass wir uns verpflichten, die Menschen nach Europa zu bringen. Wir haben uns viele Monate dagegen gewehrt und haben laut protestiert. Als Antwort der EU hat man unsere Schiffe beschlagnahmt oder uns die Einfahrt in europäische Häfen verweigert. Die EU hat uns zum Unterschreiben genötigt – erst dadurch sind wir überhaupt in der furchtbaren Situation, die Menschen nach Europa bringen zu müssen. Wir tun dies unter Protest.
Unser ursprünglicher Auftrag war die schlichte Seenotrettung. Wir haben die Menschen aus dem Wasser gezogen und MRCC Rom die Anzahl der Geretteten gemeldet. Normalerweise dürfen wir uns aus eigener Kraft nicht mehr bewegen, sobald wir auch nur einen Flüchtling an Bord haben. Rom hat dann umliegende behördliche Schiffe informiert (meist schiffe der Nato), welche uns die Geretteten abgenommen haben. Flüchlingsaufnahmen sind Behördensache. Leben retten ist zivile Pflicht. Seit dem CoC, müssen wir zwangsläufig geltendes Recht brechen.

BEHAUPTUNG 4: DIE NGO´S SIND EIN PULL-FAKTOR
Nein. Wir haben erst angefangen Rettungseinsätze zu fahren, nachdem mehrere 10.000 Menschen im Mittelmeer aufgrund der Untätigkeit der EU ertrunken sind. Das konnten viele nicht ertragen. Deswegen wollten wir das ändern. Zuerst sind die Menschen ertrunken – erst danach begannen die Rettungseinsätze. Vorher haben vor allem Frachtschiffe oder Schiffe der Nato diese Rettungseinsätze durchgeführt. Mit mäßigem Erfolg. Zum Retten in internationalen Gewässern ist im Übrigen jeder verpflichtet – tut man dies nicht, drohen lange Haftstrafen. Wenn ein NGO Schiff also einen Distress Call erhält, so ist dieses Schiff dazu verpflichtet zu retten. Tut es das nicht, verstößt man gegen das internationale Völker- und Seerecht.
ncpin  nct  Refugees  Legal  EU  Politics  Immigration 
july 2018 by walt74
Laurie Penny: Peterson’s Complaint
Ich weiß weder, ob dieser Text von Laurie Penny ein Review von Petersons für mich irrelevantem Lebensratgeber sein soll, oder eine Anleitung zum Peterson-Ignore (wahrscheinlich letzteres). Aber ich finde in dem Text gemessen an seiner Länge bemerkenswert wenige tatsächliche Argumente und am Ende will sie einen Psychologie-Professor mit hunderten akademischen Zitierungen in das Reich der Fiktion verbannen.

Ein paar Punkte hat sie dann zwar doch im Mittelteil (Peterson spricht die Feels „weißer junger Männer“ an und so weiter), doch insgesamt finde ich auch hier keine wirklich valide Kritik und die Reduktion auf einen Carl-Jung-Rezitierer ist sowohl unehrlich als auch journalistisch unethisch. Hatte Laurie Penny besser in Erinnerung. Naja.

Link: https://longreads.com/2018/07/12/petersons-complaint/
nct  ncpin  JordanPeterson  Feminism  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Quillette: I Was the Mob Until the Mob Came for Me
Link: https://quillette.com/2018/07/14/i-was-the-mob-until-the-mob-came-for-me/

Every time I would call someone racist or sexist, I would get a rush. That rush would then be reaffirmed and sustained by the stars, hearts, and thumbs-up that constitute the nickels and dimes of social media validation. The people giving me these stars, hearts, and thumbs-up were engaging in their own cynical game: A fear of being targeted by the mob induces us to signal publicly that we are part of it.

Just a few years ago, many of my friends and peers who self-identify as liberals or progressives were open fans of provocative standup comedians such as Sarah Silverman, and shows like South Park. Today, such material is seen as deeply “problematic,” or even labeled as hate speech. I went from minding my own business when people told risqué jokes to practically fainting when they used the wrong pronoun or expressed a right-of-center view. I went from making fun of the guy who took edgy jokes too seriously, to becoming that guy.

When my callouts were met with approval and admiration, I was lavished with praise: “Thank you so much for speaking out!” “You’re so brave!” “We need more men like you!”

Then one day, suddenly, I was accused of some of the very transgressions I’d called out in others. I was guilty, of course: There’s no such thing as due process in this world. And once judgment has been rendered against you, the mob starts combing through your past, looking for similar transgressions that might have been missed at the time. I was now told that I’d been creating a toxic environment for years at my workplace; that I’d been making the space around me unsafe through microaggressions and macroaggressions alike.

Social justice is a surveillance culture, a snitch culture.
nct  ncpin  IlliberalLeft  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
FAZ: Die AfD setzt auf Umverteilung und die Angst vor Altersarmut
Ich habe die AfD lange als „Nationalkapitalisten“ bezeichnet. Anscheinend schwenken sie schon seit längerem und mittlerweile in der Breite auf klassischen Nationalsozialismus um. Wie ich seit immer sage: Es ist eine rechtsradikale Partei.

Link: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/mehr-wirtschaft/die-afd-setzt-auf-umverteilung-und-die-angst-vor-altersarmut-15691333.html?GEPC=s3&premium=0xc73c20968cd15046c8062de49d484047

Als „Partei des sozialen Friedens“ zieht die AfD mit einem linken Programm in die kommenden Wahlkämpfe. Die Idee mit historischen Vorbildern könnte funktionieren.
nct  ncpin  AFD  Nazis  Politics 
july 2018 by walt74
Debattenkultur: Kühler Mut
Link: https://www.brandeins.de/magazine/brand-eins-wirtschaftsmagazin/2017/mut/kuehler-mut

Empörung macht alles gleich, das Falsche und das Gefährliche, die Existenzbedrohung und die Geschmacksfrage.

All das führt zu jener Überreizung, die die Grenzen immer mehr ins Irrationale verschiebt. Immer wenn die Empörungswelle abzuebben beginnt, kommt ein neuer Schub, ein neuer Anlass. Wie heißt es so schön: Nur weil ich paranoid bin, bedeutet das noch lange nicht, dass ich nicht verfolgt werde.
Alarm. Alarm.

Alle klingeln wie verrückt. Aber wer macht eigentlich die Feuerwehr? […]

Wer entscheiden will, muss Gleichmut leben. Wer richtig handeln will, muss Gelassenheit in sich tragen. „Selbst wenn die zerborstene Welt einstürzt, werden die Trümmer einen Furchtlosen treffen“, schreibt Horaz.

Das ist die Gegenthese zur Wut und zum Widerstand gegen alles, was man nicht leiden kann, der sich heute so wohlfeil in allen politischen Lagern und Lebenslagen aneignen lässt. Wer glaubt, Probleme dadurch lösen zu können, indem er sich – ohne großen Aufwand – zu den moralisch Bessergestellten gesellt und dort dann mit den Wölfen heult, handelt fahrlässig und falsch.

Es ist heute weitaus mutiger, zu den Gelassenen zu gehören als zu den Empörten. Es gehört keine Courage dazu, sich aufzuregen und „Nein!“ zu rufen – und dann nichts mehr zu tun. Furchtlos sind diejenigen, die sagen: Es muss uns was Besseres einfallen. Lasst uns nachdenken. Vor allen Dingen dann, wenn die Alternative, wie heute, keineswegs so klar ist. Nüchterner Optimismus verzagt nicht an der Zukunft.
nct  ncpin  Outrage  Debattenkultur  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Der endlose Shitstorm
Link: https://www.salonkolumnisten.com/der-endlose-shitstorm/

Es gibt die Pflicht zur Menschenrettung, zu dieser „praktischen Intelligenz“, von der Böll sprach, aber nicht zu der Politik, die daraus als moralisch alternativlos abgeleitet wird. Man kann es bei Unterstützern, Aktivisten, Shitstormern allerorten lesen: Letztendlich geht es ihnen um eine multikulturelle Gesellschaft nach ihren Vorstellungen, um Postkolonialismus, Grenzenlosigkeit, Ablehnung des Nationalstaats und den Flüchtling als neues revolutionäres Subjekt. Ob die Migranten, Asylsuchenden und Flüchtlinge alle diese Ziele teilen? Oder wollen sie nicht viel lieber in ein wohlhabendes, freies, sicheres Europa, das ihnen und ihren Familien eine Zukunft bietet und kein gesellschaftspolitisches Experiment?

Das aber wirklich Deprimierende in der heutigen Situation ist jedoch nicht so sehr, dass da, wo Moral drauf steht, Politik drin ist – nein, diese Camouflage wird ohnehin keinen Erfolg haben. Das Problem ist, dass da, wo Politik drauf steht, nichts drin ist, gar nichts bislang: kein Masterplan für Afrika, kein Wille zur europäischen Einigung über die Verteilung von Flüchtlingen, keine Initiative und kein Gesetz für legale Wege der Einwanderung. Es würde sicher einen Schub geben, wenn die Shitstormer in Zukunft nicht mehr die moralische Entrüstung als zweckhaften Hebel zur Beendigung von Diskussionen ansetzten, sondern wenn auch sie Vorschläge machten für mehrheitsfähige, also realistische politische Lösungen.
Refugees  Immigration  Journalism  Outrage  OutrageMemetics  Media  nct  ncpin  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Complicating the Narratives: „Complexity is contagious“
Link: https://thewholestory.solutionsjournalism.org/complicating-the-narratives-b91ea06ddf63
Researchers have a name for the kind of divide America is currently experiencing. They call this an “intractable conflict,” as social psychologist Peter T. Coleman describes in his book The Five Percent, and it’s very similar to the kind of wicked feuds that emerge in about one out of every 20 conflicts worldwide. In this dynamic, people’s encounters with the other tribe (political, religious, ethnic, racial or otherwise) become more and more charged. And the brain behaves differently in charged interactions. It’s impossible to feel curious, for example, while also feeling threatened.

In this hypervigilant state, we feel an involuntary need to defend our side and attack the other. That anxiety renders us immune to new information. In other words: no amount of investigative reporting or leaked documents will change our mind, no matter what.

Intractable conflicts feed upon themselves. The more we try to stop the conflict, the worse it gets. These feuds “seem to have a power of their own that is inexplicable and total, driving people and groups to act in ways that go against their best interests and sow the seeds of their ruin,” Coleman writes. “We often think we understand these conflicts and can choose how to react to them, that we have options. We are usually mistaken, however.”

Once we get drawn in, the conflict takes control. Complexity collapses, and the us-versus-them narrative sucks the oxygen from the room. “Over time, people grow increasingly certain of the obvious rightness of their views and increasingly baffled by what seems like unreasonable, malicious, extreme or crazy beliefs and actions of others,” according to training literature from Resetting the Table, an organization that helps people talk across profound differences in the Middle East and the U.S.

The cost of intractable conflict is also predictable. “[E]veryone loses,” writes Resetting the Table’s co-founder Eyal Rabinovitch. “Such conflicts undermine the dignity and integrity of all involved and stand as obstacles to creative thinking and wise solutions.”

There are ways to disrupt an intractable conflict, as history bears out. Over decades of work, in laboratories and on the margins of battlefields, scholars like Coleman, Rabinovitch and others have identified dozens of ways to break out of the trap, some of which are directly relevant to journalists. […]

The Conversation Whisperer

In a hard-to-find windowless room at Columbia University, there is something called a Difficult Conversations Laboratory. Coleman and colleagues use the lab to study real-life conflict in a controlled setting, inspired in part by the Love Lab in Seattle (where psychologists Julie and John Gottman have famously studied thousands of married couples for many years). […]

Over time, the researchers noticed a key difference between the terrible and non-terrible conversations: The better conversations looked like a constellation of feelings and points, rather than a tug of war. They were more complex.

But could that complexity be artificially induced? Was there a way to cultivate better conversations? To find out, the researchers started giving the participants something to read before they met — a short article on another polarizing issue. One version of the article laid out both sides of a given controversy, similar to a traditional news story — arguing the case in favor of gun rights, for example, followed by the case for gun control.

The alternate version contained all the same information — written in a different way. That article emphasized the complexity of the gun debate, rather than describing it as a binary issue. So the author explained many different points of view, with more nuance and compassion. It read less like a lawyer’s opening statement and more like an anthropologist’s field notes.

After reading the article, the two participants met to discuss Middle East peace — or another unrelated controversy. It turns out that the pre-conversation reading mattered: in the difficult conversations that followed, people who had read the more simplistic article tended to get stuck in negativity. But those who had read the more complex articles did not. They asked more questions, proposed higher quality ideas and left the lab more satisfied with their conversations. “They don’t solve the debate,” Coleman says, “but they do have a more nuanced understanding and more willingness to continue the conversation.” Complexity is contagious, it turns out, which is wonderful news for humanity. […]

The idea is to revive complexity in a time of false simplicity. “The problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue but that they are incomplete,” novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie says in her mesmerizing TED Talk “A Single Story.” “[I]t’s impossible to engage properly with a place or a person without engaging with all of the stories of that place and that person.”

Usually, reporters do the opposite. We cut the quotes that don’t fit our narrative. Or our editor cuts them for us. We look for coherence, which is tidy — and natural. The problem is that, in a time of high conflict, coherence is bad journalism, bordering on malpractice.

In the midst of conflict, our audiences are profoundly uncomfortable, and they want to feel better. “The natural human tendency is to reduce that tension,” Coleman writes, “by seeking coherence through simplification.” Tidy narratives succumb to this urge to simplify, gently warping reality until one side looks good and the other looks evil. We soothe ourselves with the knowledge that all Republicans are racist rednecks — or all Democrats are precious snowflakes who hate America.

Complexity counters this craving, restoring the cracks and inconsistencies that had been air-brushed out of the picture. It’s less comforting, yes. But it’s also more interesting — and true.
nct  ncpin  Outrage  OutrageMemetics  Complexity  Journalism  Media  Storytelling  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Through the Looking Glass at Concordia University
Link: https://quillette.com/2018/07/02/through-the-looking-glass-at-concordia-university/

What I am providing here are small glimpses into what my existence at Concordia was like. My first, grueling year of graduate school was not marked by a solitary dramatic event. It was a sequence, a pattern, what I eventually realized was an epidemic. In almost every class, I found myself brushing up against what I had come to think of as the moral gatekeepers of the academy. By acting, or failing to act, by sustaining an arena where students—young, unformed, knowing not what they do—were encouraged to run wild and roughshod over all standards of fairness, openness, and intellectual inquiry, the professors had allowed the institution to transform into something of a madhouse. Select identities, authors, voices, words, and thoughts were permitted at the table; the rest were cast out or barred, without question, as though everything had already been decided. Any pursuit of truth, or dialectic of ideas, was cut off at the knees before it even got started, as the participants expended their energies policing language and asserting their moral virtue. It didn’t even matter if the students making the complaints were in the minority—all it took was one. Instead of a widening of horizons at university, I experienced there a strange sort of thinning, a constriction of the known world and all of reality into a single, narrow, idiosyncratic and firmly imposed set of perceptions and thoughts, an orthodoxy, a faith.

The academy, it seems to me now, has reverted in some ways to its old role as a religious institute, as in the days before Newton, a place of enforced consensus and theological purity. Percy Shelley was famously expelled from Oxford for atheism, for daring to question the orthodoxy of the University, and I see no evidence that he would fare much better today.

For readers, Alice’s journey in Wonderland is amusing. But to be Alice is something altogether different. The experience is hard to pin down with words. With few exceptions, no one on campus is officially censored. But the culture itself exerts power. One feels constantly judged. One is always on-edge. To perceive nuance, to be skeptical, to ask questions, gets one quickly accused of moral deficiency. The students are zealous, the professors often unprepared, fearful, or complicit.
nct  ncpin  CampusPolitics  IlliberalLeft  PoliticalCorrectness  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
We Are All Public Figures Now
Ella Dawson über eine der creepiest Viral-Storys 2018: https://elladawson.com/2018/07/08/we-are-all-public-figures-now/

Gibts auch als Sort-Of-Kurzversion in <a href="https://twitter.com/MinovskyArticle/status/1014584128530997249">diesem Twitter-Thread</a>: „This is being shared around like it’s cute, but in reality it’s the kind of invasive nightmare that makes you want to become a hermit.“
The woman on the plane is unaware that the woman sitting in the row behind her is watching and recording her every move. Rosey Blair, the stranger she helped sit beside her boyfriend, is projecting a story on top of her interactions that soon takes the internet by storm. Her detailed breakdown of their conversation and body language racks up hundreds of thousands of likes and retweets. Blair herself begins to accumulate thousands of new Twitter followers.

Not long after the plane touches down in Texas, the hordes of strangers following Blair’s tweets are eager to discover the identities of the personal trainers from Dallas. A hunt begins to find her Instagram account. Later the man, her seatmate Euan Holden, participates in the growing media circus because he also gains a ton of twitter followers, or because it helps his career, or because it’s fun, or because it’s just too late to go back to the anonymity of before. […]

the media industry wants to broaden our definition of the public so that it will be fair game for discussion and content creation, meaning they can create more articles and videos, meaning they can sell more ads. The tech industry wants everything to be public because coding for privacy is difficult, and because our data, if public, is something they can sell. Our policy makers have failed to define what’s public in this digital age because, well, they don’t understand it and wouldn’t know where to begin. And also, because lobbyists don’t want them to.

I think a lot about us, the normal ones, the average citizens. The idea that our privacy is in jeopardy is a relatively new concept, born from the 2016 election and the Cambridge Analytica scandal. There’s growing awareness of just how much of our private lives we’ve ceded to Facebook. But even now, most of us feel safe online, because what do we have to hide? Who would care what we have to say? Who is watching us? What’s the worst that could happen? […]

A woman boarded a plane in New York and stepped off that plane in Dallas. She chatted with a stranger, showed him some family photos, brushed his elbow with her own. She wore a baseball cap over her face and followed him back on Instagram. At no point did she agree to participate in the story Rosey Blair was telling. After the fact, when the hunt began and the woman took no part in encouraging it the way Holden did, Blair tweeted a video in which she drawled, “We don’t have the gal’s permish yet, not yet y’all, but I’m sure you guys are sneaky, you guys might…”

Blair’s followers were sneaky. They did as they were told and immediately replied with screenshots of the woman’s Instagram account. They shared links.

When people called Blair out for this blatant invasion of privacy, she blocked them. Because she, apparently, could control her own boundaries. Later she tweeted about wanting a job at BuzzFeed.

I don’t know what the woman on the plane is thinking or feeling. I don’t know if she’s afraid or angry or mildly amused but inconvenienced. But I know how it feels to see strangers scrawling obscenities in a space you once considered safe, commenting alongside your friends and family members. I know the sour humiliation of knowing everyone in your life can see that strangers have written about you—your parents, your coworkers, your exes.

Even when the attention is positive, it is overwhelming and frightening. Your mind reels at the possibility of what they could find: your address, if your voting records are logged online; your cellphone number, if you accidentally included it on a form somewhere; your unflattering selfies at the beginning of your Facebook photo archive. There are hundreds of Facebook friend requests, press requests from journalists in your Instagram inbox, even people contacting your employer when they can’t reach you directly. This story you didn’t choose becomes the main story of your life. It replaces who you really are as the narrative someone else has written is tattooed onto your skin.

There is no opting-in, no consent form, no opportunity to take it all back. It feels like you are drowning as everyone on the beach applauds your swimming prowess. You are relevant, and that is the best thing you can be in this new world. What do you have to complain about? Why wouldn’t you want this?

What Blair did and continues to do as she stokes the flames of this story despite knowing this woman wants no part of it goes beyond intrusive. It is selfish, disrespectful harassment. The violation of this woman’s privacy is less important than Blair’s growing platform and ambition. It is not a romantic comedy for the digital age, it is an act of dehumanization. It is a taking of someone else’s identity and privacy for your own purposes. That this is happening online makes it more, not less serious—its impact is instant, and anyone can join in the fun.
nct  ncpin  Privacy  Memetics  Viral  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
The Left's Mischaracterizations of Jordan Peterson Will Make His Followers Turn Right
Link: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/07/09/28930684/the-lefts-mischaracterizations-of-jordan-peterson-will-make-his-followers-turn-right

This morning, for instance, I was engaged in a stupid Twitter fight with a media person in LA, who claims that Peterson is racist. When I asked for evidence, she sent me a link to a 2016 tweet that was taken wildly out of context. She also sent a screenshot of a Vox article that said Peterson “referred to developing nations as 'pits of catastrophe' in a speech to a Dutch far-right group.” In fact, the Dutch “far-right group” he was speaking to was actually a conference in which both conservatives and progressives were invited to attend and debate immigration and Dutch culture, although apparently not many progressives actually showed up.

At the conference, Peterson said: “When we insist that the immigrants who come to our countries, to become beneficiaries of the game that we're playing, follow the rules, we are not merely saying; 'we have a culture, you have a culture, you're in our culture, so you should follow our rules', what we're saying instead is: 'We have inherited a culture and it seems to work. It works well enough so that we're happy to be here, and many people would like to be, and if you want to come to our culture and be a beneficiary of the game, then you have to abide by the rules that produce the game. We're not saying that you have to do it because it's ours, or because we're proud of it, or because in some sense we're right as individuals, or even as a culture. We're saying it because we've been fortunate enough to observe what the rules that make a functioning society actually are, and sensible enough, thank God, most of the time, to follow them well enough so that there are a few countries on the planet that aren't absolute pits of catastrophe.'"

Referring to developing nations as “pits of catastrophe” may be insensitive at best, Trumpian at worst, but it’s also true that developing nations do have more than their fair share of “catastrophe,” both natural and man-made (including from colonialism and Western intervention itself). Peterson’s statement may be pro-assimilation, but he’s not saying that any one culture or society is inherently better than any other. He’s saying, if you join a new community, play by that community’s rules because they probably work. Is that really grounds to scream “racist”? In 2018, I suppose, yes.
IlliberalLeft  JordanPeterson  nct  ncpin  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Douglas Rushkoff: Survival of the Richest
Link: https://medium.com/s/futurehuman/survival-of-the-richest-9ef6cddd0cc1
Last year, I got invited to a super-deluxe private resort to deliver a keynote speech to what I assumed would be a hundred or so investment bankers. It was by far the largest fee I had ever been offered for a talk — about half my annual professor’s salary — all to deliver some insight on the subject of “the future of technology.” […] After I arrived, I was ushered into what I thought was the green room. But instead of being wired with a microphone or taken to a stage, I just sat there at a plain round table as my audience was brought to me: five super-wealthy guys — yes, all men — from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world. After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology. They had come with questions of their own. […]

“How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?”

The Event. That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr. Robot hack that takes everything down.

This single question occupied us for the rest of the hour. They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs. But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless? What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader? The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew. Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers — if that technology could be developed in time.

That’s when it hit me: At least as far as these gentlemen were concerned, this was a talk about the future of technology. Taking their cue from Elon Musk colonizing Mars, Peter Thiel reversing the aging process, or Sam Altman and Ray Kurzweil uploading their minds into supercomputers, they were preparing for a digital future that had a whole lot less to do with making the world a better place than it did with transcending the human condition altogether and insulating themselves from a very real and present danger of climate change, rising sea levels, mass migrations, global pandemics, nativist panic, and resource depletion. For them, the future of technology is really about just one thing: escape. […]

Digital futures became understood more like stock futures or cotton futures — something to predict and make bets on. So nearly every speech, article, study, documentary, or white paper was seen as relevant only insofar as it pointed to a ticker symbol. The future became less a thing we create through our present-day choices or hopes for humankind than a predestined scenario we bet on with our venture capital but arrive at passively.

This freed everyone from the moral implications of their activities. Technology development became less a story of collective flourishing than personal survival. Worse, as I learned, to call attention to any of this was to unintentionally cast oneself as an enemy of the market or an anti-technology curmudgeon. […]

Our movies and television shows play out these fantasies for us. Zombie shows depict a post-apocalypse where people are no better than the undead — and seem to know it. Worse, these shows invite viewers to imagine the future as a zero-sum battle between the remaining humans, where one group’s survival is dependent on another one’s demise. Even Westworld — based on a science-fiction novel where robots run amok — ended its second season with the ultimate reveal: Human beings are simpler and more predictable than the artificial intelligences we create. The robots learn that each of us can be reduced to just a few lines of code, and that we’re incapable of making any willful choices. Heck, even the robots in that show want to escape the confines of their bodies and spend their rest of their lives in a computer simulation.

The mental gymnastics required for such a profound role reversal between humans and machines all depend on the underlying assumption that humans suck. Let’s either change them or get away from them, forever.

Thus, we get tech billionaires launching electric cars into space — as if this symbolizes something more than one billionaire’s capacity for corporate promotion. And if a few people do reach escape velocity and somehow survive in a bubble on Mars — despite our inability to maintain such a bubble even here on Earth in either of two multibillion-dollar Biosphere trials — the result will be less a continuation of the human diaspora than a lifeboat for the elite.

When the hedge funders asked me the best way to maintain authority over their security forces after “the event,” I suggested that their best bet would be to treat those people really well, right now. They should be engaging with their security staffs as if they were members of their own family. And the more they can expand this ethos of inclusivity to the rest of their business practices, supply chain management, sustainability efforts, and wealth distribution, the less chance there will be of an “event” in the first place. All this technological wizardry could be applied toward less romantic but entirely more collective interests right now.

They were amused by my optimism, but they didn’t really buy it. They were not interested in how to avoid a calamity; they’re convinced we are too far gone. For all their wealth and power, they don’t believe they can affect the future. They are simply accepting the darkest of all scenarios and then bringing whatever money and technology they can employ to insulate themselves — especially if they can’t get a seat on the rocket to Mars.

Luckily, those of us without the funding to consider disowning our own humanity have much better options available to us. We don’t have to use technology in such antisocial, atomizing ways. We can become the individual consumers and profiles that our devices and platforms want us to be, or we can remember that the truly evolved human doesn’t go it alone.

Being human is not about individual survival or escape. It’s a team sport. Whatever future humans have, it will be together.
nct  ncpin  Psychology  Economy  Finance  Bankster  Luxury  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Interview mit Belle Heiss von Volt, der ersten länderübergreifenden Partei in Europa
Jeden Tag spielen sich im Mittelmeer Katastrophen ab, die Menschenleben fordern. Beinahe wöchentlich fragen EU-Politiker einander, wer welche Geflüchteten aufnimmt und wie viele. Wer muss die Verantwortung tragen für das, was auf dem Mittelmeer passiert? Für Andrea Venzon, 28, Italiener, ist die Antwort klar: Europa muss zusammenarbeiten. Vor zwei Jahren gründete er mit zwei Freunden, einer Französin und einem Deutschen, die Bewegung „Volt“, die als erste länderübergreifende Partei in ganz Europa aktiv werden soll. Seit dem Facebook-Launch von Volt im März 2017 ist die Bewegung auf mehr als 5000 Mitglieder aus allen EU-Staaten gewachsen. In Deutschland und sechs anderen EU-Staaten bemühen sich die Mitglieder gerade darum, als Partei anerkannt zu werden. Ihr Ziel: Bei der Europawahl im Mai 2019 anzutreten und eine Fraktion im Europaparlament zu stellen. In Deutschland hat Volt derzeit 400 Unterstützer und finanziert sich noch über Crowdfunding.

Link: https://www.jetzt.de/politik/interview-mit-belle-heiss-von-volt-der-ersten-laenderuebergreifenden-partei-in-europa
https://www.voltdeutschland.org/
nct  ncpin  Politics  Europe  EU  Volt 
july 2018 by walt74
Diskriminierungen: Die Politisierung der Tränendrüse
Im Kontext struktureller Gewalt bedeutet Schuld nicht, Privilegien innezuhaben, sondern diese nicht zu reflektieren. Ein weißer Mann, wie er auch von Neft angeführt wird, ist selbstverständlich nicht sofort Täter oder Mittäter, nur weil er ein weißer Mann ist. Hört er aber jenen, die keine weißen Männer sind, nicht zu, und denkt nicht darüber nach, was es wohl gesellschaftlich bedeutet, ein weißer Mann zu sein, stabilisiert er ein System, das anderen schadet. Kein einzelner Mensch trägt kausale Schuld an systemischem und strukturellem Unrecht. Wer sich aber weigert, sich als Teil einer historisch gewachsenen gesellschaftlichen Struktur zu sehen, die eben nicht von Gott oder der Natur gegeben ist, der trägt die moralische Schuld, Unrecht nicht anerkannt und nichts dagegen getan zu haben. […]

Nicht der Kampf gegen Pluralismus, sondern eine solidarische Haltung auch mit Menschen, die man als anders wahrnimmt, stärkt eine Gesellschaft. Man kann natürlich beweinen, dass es nicht ausreicht, für andere zu sprechen, auch wenn man noch so gute Absichten hat. Menschen möchten explizit mitwirken und für sich selbst sprechen – was bedeutet, dass man gewisse überkommene Strukturen schlicht loslassen und sich selbst auch mal zurücknehmen muss. Nur, weil strukturell Privilegierte die medienwirksame Politisierung der Tränendrüse für sich entdeckt haben, bedeutet das nicht, dass damit nun alle Individuen und Gruppen marginalisiert sind.


Link: https://www.zeit.de/kultur/2018-06/diskriminierungen-opfer-taeter-politisierung-opferkultur-gewalt/komplettansicht
nct  ncpin  IdentityPolitics  Feminism  Left  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Ukip's new guard: web agitators threaten to swamp struggling party
Die Mitterechts-Youtube-Prominenz und 1 Troll wollen UKIP „übernehmen“. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/29/ukips-new-guard-web-agitators-threaten-to-swamp-struggling-party
The best-known new arrival is Paul Joseph Watson, who has 1.2m YouTube subscribers. Calling himself a small-government libertarian, Watson works for Infowars, the US conspiracy theory website that has claimed the Sandy Hook primary school shooting was a hoax.

Another is Carl Benjamin, who posts videos as Sargon of Akkad and has attracted condemnation for alleged misogyny – he described some of Harvey Weinstein’s victims as “gold-digging whores” – and taunts about rape on Twitter, from which he is banned.

Finally there is Mark Meechan, on YouTube as Count Dankula. A self-styled comedian, he is best known for being fined £800 after he posted a video of his girlfriend’s pug raising its paw in response to comments such as “gas the Jews”.

Ukip has confirmed all three have been accepted into the party. Another online activist, the , has applied for membership but it remains unknown if this will be approved.

The group’s motives remain unclear, and are partly based on a joke. Meechan began the process by pledging to join if a tweet was retweeted 10,000 times, while Benjamin posted a video saying he was doing so “for the bantz”. But they have pledged to take the party over, with 1,000 new members arriving in their wake, according to Ukip sources.
ncpin  nct  Youtube  SocialMedia  Trolls  Politics  Right  AltRight  Brexit  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Meedia: Die Probleme mit dem Echtzeit-Journalismus: Was Medien aus der CSU-Chaosnacht lernen können
Medien behelfen sich bei der Berichterstattung über ungelegte Eier gerne und immer häufiger mit Rückversicherungs-Begriffen wie “offenbar”, “mutmaßlich” oder Konjunktiv-Konstruktionen (s.o.). Bei allem, was man nicht genau weiß oder was noch gar nicht klar sein kann, wird ein “offenbar” eingestreut und schon ist man als Berichterstatter vermeintlich aus dem Schneider: “Seehofer offenbar zurückgetreten”. Tritt er dann doch nicht zurück, kann man sagen: Ich hatte ja “offenbar” gesagt. Das “offenbar” wird hier im Sinne von “angeblich” verwendet und soll bedeuten, dass man es nicht so genau weiß, sondern lediglich gehört oder woanders gelesen hat. “Offenbar” ist eines der augenfälligsten Symptome des grassierenden Hörensagen-Journalismus. Dabei ist “offenbar” vom Wortsinn her eigentlich ein Synonym für “offensichtlich”, wird aber in den Medien in diesem eigentlichen Sinn kaum verwendet. Eine ähnlich fatale Karriere, vielleicht sogar eine noch fatalere, hat das Wort “mutmaßlich” gemacht. Der “mutmaßliche” Mörder, der “mutmaßliche” Attentäter. Das “mutmaßlich” wird vom Publikum in der Regel überlesen oder nicht für voll genommen. Das mag auch daran liegen, dass Redaktionen wie die Bild bei ihrer Titelgestaltung das “mutmaßlich” so winzig klein in die große “Mörder”-Zeile reinquetschen, dass man es leicht übersehen kann. Es scheint eine unausgesprochene Übereinkunft zwischen einigen Medien und Teilen des Publikums zu geben: Das “mutmaßlich” und “offenbar” schreiben wir zwar rein, aber richtig ernst nehmen muss man es nicht. Wird schon stimmen. Hinterher – falls es doch nicht gestimmt hat – kann man sich dann aber damit rechtfertigen: Wir hatten ja “mutmaßlich” geschrieben. […]

Bei den beschriebenen Phänomenen machen die Medien und Journalisten nichts falsch. Es werden keine “Fake-News” verbreitet oder handwerkliche Fehler gemacht. Die Probleme sind sozusagen die natürlichen Auswirkungen der Möglichkeiten von Internet und vor allem von Social Media auf den Journalismus. […]

Man kann den einzelnen Journalisten dabei aber keine Vorwürfe machen, dass sie “heiße News” direkt aus der Vorstandssitzung via Twitter direkt weitergeben. Ebenso wollen Journalisten schnell auch eine Meinung, eine Einordnung liefern. Dass dies im Getümmel der sich noch entwickelnden Lage schlicht kaum möglich ist, ist im Mediensystem (noch) nicht vorgesehen. Die Redaktionsleitung, das Publikum, das eigene Selbstverständnis bringen Journalisten dazu zu handeln, wie sie es gewohnt sind.

Und wenn man selbst die Werkzeuge für den Instant-Journalismus nicht nutzen würde – die Konkurrenz würde es tun. Nicht zu berichten, wäre also auch keine Lösung.


Link: https://meedia.de/2018/07/02/die-probleme-mit-dem-echtzeit-journalismus-was-medien-aus-der-csu-chaosnacht-lernen-koennen/
nct  ncpin  Journalism  Media  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Understanding Victimhood Culture: An Interview with Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning
In dignity cultures, there is a low sensitivity to slight. People are more tolerant of insult and disagreement. Children might be taught some variant of “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me.” It’s good to have “thick skin,” and people might be criticized for being too touchy and overreacting to slights. If the issue in the conflict is something more than a slight or insult — say, a violent assault — you’re to handle the matter through appeal to authorities such as the legal system. Taking the law into your own hands with violent vengeance is itself a serious crime and generally looked down upon.

In honor cultures, there’s a much greater sensitivity to slight. Insults demand a serious response, and even accidental slights might provoke severe conflict. Having a low tolerance for offense is more likely to be seen as a virtue than a vice. Letting yourself be slighted without seeking justice is shameful. And seeking justice is more likely to take the form of violent vengeance. Appealing to authorities is more stigmatized than taking matters into your own hands.

These two kinds of cultures emphasize different sources of moral status or worth. Honor is one’s status in the eyes of other people. It depends on reputation. And while a lot of things might go into making this reputation, the core of classical honor is physical bravery. Tolerating slights is shameful because you let someone put you down without defending your reputation by force. It suggests cowardice. Appealing to the authorities is shameful for the same reason. Virtue means being bold and forceful, aggressively defending your reputation against any challenges, and being vigilant for signs that someone else is probing you for weakness.

Dignity is a kind of inherent and inalienable moral worth. It doesn’t depend on your standing in the eyes of other people. A dignity culture emphasizes that all people have this sort of worth, which can’t be taken away. It’s why an insult can’t devalue you. If anything, overreacting to an offense is unseemly because it suggests you’re not confident in your worth and need to take other people’s opinions so seriously. Virtue isn’t being bold, touchy, and aggressive, but restrained, prudent, and quietly self-assured.

What we call victimhood culture combines some aspects of honor and dignity. People in a victimhood culture are like the honorable in having a high sensitivity to slight. They’re quite touchy, and always vigilant for offenses. Insults are serious business, and even unintentional slights might provoke a severe conflict. But, as in a dignity culture, people generally eschew violent vengeance in favor of relying on some authority figure or other third party. They complain to the law, to the human resources department at their corporation, to the administration at their university, or — possibly as a strategy of getting attention from one of the former — to the public at large.

The combination of high sensitivity with dependence on others encourages people to emphasize or exaggerate the severity of offenses. There’s a corresponding tendency to emphasize one’s degree of victimization, one’s vulnerability to harm, and one’s need for assistance and protection. People who air grievances are likely to appeal to such concepts as disadvantage, marginality, or trauma, while casting the conflict as a matter of oppression.

The result is that this culture also emphasizes a particular source of moral worth: victimhood. Victim identities are deserving of special care and deference. Contrariwise, the privileged are morally suspect if not deserving of outright contempt. Privilege is to victimhood as cowardice is to honor.


Link: https://quillette.com/2018/05/17/understanding-victimhood-culture-interview-bradley-campbell-jason-manning/
nct  ncpin  VictimhoodCulture  OppressionOlympics  Feminism  IlliberalLeft  Soziologie  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
The Evils of Cultural Appropriation
One might make the case that while complaints about cultural appropriation are annoying, they are ultimately harmless. What is the harm in showing deference to peoples who have historically been the victims of exploitation, discrimination, and unfair treatment? What is the harm in showing respect and compliance with these new rules—isn’t it a way of making up for past sins?

The short answer to these questions is, no. The notion that a person can be held as responsible for actions that he or she did not commit strikes at the very heart of our conception of human rights and justice.

We used to take calls for collective punishment much more seriously. In the 1949 Geneva Convention it was determined that: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed.” Collective punishment was seen as a tactic designed to intimidate and subdue an entire population. The drafters of the Geneva Convention clearly had in mind the atrocities committed in WWI and WWII where entire villages and communities suffered mass retribution for the resistance activities of a few. In their commentary on the outlawing of collective punishment the International Red Cross stated: “A great step forward has been taken. Responsibility is personal and it will no longer be possible to inflict penalties on persons who have themselves not committed the acts complained of.”

In times of peace, collective punishment may come in the form of social media dust-ups over sombrero hats or Chinese dresses. Gradual softening on the taboo of collective punishment does not bode well for the health of liberal democracies. Which is also why it is important for us all to remember that social-justice activists who complain about cultural appropriation only represent themselves, and not the minority groups to which they belong.


Link: https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/263933/cultural-appropriation
CulturalAppropriation  ncpin  nct  CollectiveGuilt  GuiltByAssociation  IlliberalLeft  DGNI 
july 2018 by walt74
Inquisitorischer Wahn / Greiser Horizont
Jürgen Roth über die Entlassung des Karikaturisten Hanitzsch: https://www.freitag.de/autoren/der-freitag/inquisitorischer-wahn
Satire, Komik, gelungene, auch „das Stiefkind unserer Kultur, die komische Zeichnung“ (Gernhardt), ist dann lustig, wenn sie Lust erregt. Die Lust speist sich aus der Verzerrung, Übertreibung, Maßlosigkeit, Bodenlosigkeit, Blasphemie, Renitenz. Sie ist realitätstranszendierend triebhaft und daher antiautoritär, ab und an, wie es Gernhardt anhand von Wilhelm Busch erläuterte, herzlos und kaltblütig und boshaft. Sie ist asozial, weil normverletzend, abstoßend, weil in den Augen der Status-quo-Bewahrer schmutzig, subversiv. Der SZ-Feuilletonchef Andrian Kreye soll gefordert haben, bei „Karikaturen künftig ganz auf das Stilmittel der Überzeichnung zu verzichten, um solche rassistischen Stereotype zu vermeiden“, liest man nach den Hanitzsch-Turbulenzen. Nähme man Kreye beim Wort, wäre die komische Kunst in jeglicher Spielart aus der Welt, für immer.


Sophie Passmann über dasselbe Thema: https://www.freitag.de/autoren/der-freitag/greiser-horizont
Satiriker dürfen heutzutage immer noch genauso viel sagen, belächeln und bewitzeln wie früher, die Menge an anständigen Aussagen ist gleich groß geblieben. Aussagen, die heute unanständig sind, waren es auch früher schon, nur wurden die, die unter der Anstandlosigkeit litten, damals schlicht nicht beachtet. Wer Angst hat, Witze zu machen, weil er anderen auf die Füße treten könnte, leidet nicht unter den Füßen der anderen, sondern unter der eigenen Tollpatschigkeit. Man darf alles sagen in Deutschland, die einzige Frage ist, ob man es sagen will.


Beide Texte treffen ihr Ziel durchaus, auch wenn das meines Erachtens eigentliche Problem der Illiberalen Linken mit Kunstfreiheit vor allem mit einer Überbewertung von Repräsentation und Abwertung von Abstraktion zu liegen scheint: Intersektionalität, also die addierende Diskriminierung aufgrund von Identitätsmerkmalen und die daraus folgende Rücksichtnahme, landet am Ende immer beim Individuum, der kleinstmöglichen Identitätseinheit, die nicht weiter abstrahiert werden kann.

Das Ergebnis dieses Prozesses sind dann beispielsweise ernsthaft Diskussionen über die „unnatürliche“ Körperhaltung von Spider-Woman in Comics oder eben Diskussionen um überzeichnete Präsidenten von Israel. Die Illiberale Linke trifft in ihrem Wahn, jedes Individuum einen Repräsentationsrahmen zu schaffen, auf die Grenzen der Abstraktion und Kategorisierung, womit wir dann auch bei elementarsten Denkprozessen landen sowie Sprache und Grammatik selbst.
nct  ncpin  IlliberalLeft  Art  FreeSpeech  Left  Media  DGNI 
june 2018 by walt74
Entvölkerung als Nährboden rechter Politik
Der bulgarische Politologe Ivan Krastev hat in einem Interview mit dem Wiener Standard vom 9. April 2018 anlässlich der Wahlen in Ungarn am Tag davor die bereits in seinem Essay „Europadämmerung“ entwickelte These wiederholt, dass nicht die Zuwanderung, sondern die Abwanderung vor allem junger Menschen den Nährboden für rechte Populisten bilde. Auch für Deutschland gelte das, betonte Krastev: „Es gab in Deutschland eine Studie, die gezeigt hat, dass in Ostdeutschland, wenn die Auswanderung in einer Region sehr hoch war, dies ein viel besserer Prognosefaktor für den Erfolg der AfD bei Wahlen war, als wenn man auf Einwanderung geachtet hat“, so Krastev in dem Interview.


https://www.freitag.de/autoren/klute/entvoelkerung-als-naehrboden-rechter-politik-1
nct  ncpin  Nazis  Urban  Politics  Städteplanung  Demographie  Right 
june 2018 by walt74
Neue deutsche Solidaritätsbewegung
Birgit Gärtner über die unsägliche und furchtbar dumme „Solidarität statt Heimat“-Erklärung: https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Neue-deutsche-Solidaritaetsbewegung-4092657.html?seite=all
Im Text werden alle in einen Topf geworfen, ohne explizit Namen zu nennen, von Sahra Wagenknecht über Horst Seehofer und Markus Söder bis hin zu Alexander Gauland und Beatrix von Storch. Sie werden zu einem Einheitsbrei vermanscht und mit dem Begriff "Heimat" etikettiert. Dagegen setzen die Guten "Solidarität".

Willkommenskultur sei zum "Prestigefaktor" geworden, schreibt der Islamkritiker Kacem El Ghazzali, der 2011 als politischer Flüchtling in die Schweiz immigrierte, weil er sich als Atheist in Marokko nicht sicher fühlte.

"Prestigefaktor", genau das ist es. Dabei geht es nicht um Geflüchtete, sondern um das Selbstbild, die Eigenwahrnehmung - und deren Demonstranz - als gute/r Deutsche/r.

Deutschland wieder gut gemacht, das ist das Motto seit Herbst 2015. Geflüchtete müssen dafür herhalten, unsere historische Schuld zu tilgen.
nct  ncpin  Heimat  Politics  Left  Islam  Refugees  Immigration 
june 2018 by walt74
AfD-Treffen: Teilnehmer bedrohen und attackieren Journalisten
Teilnehmer des „Kyffhäusertreffens“ der AfD haben am Wochenende zwei Journalisten angegriffen und bedroht, die sie beim Verlassen des Versammlungsgeländes gefilmt haben. Die Journalisten wurden unter anderem als „Bazille“ und „dreckige Fotze“ beschimpft. Ein Mann griff die beiden auch körperlich an. Dabei wurde eine Kamera beschädigt. Ein weiterer AfD-Anhänger rief: „Ihr Dreckschweine, wir kriegen euch!“, anschließend machte er eine schneidende Handbewegung am Hals. Wir dokumentieren die Übergriffe im Video.

Übermedien: https://uebermedien.de/29322/afd-kyffhaeusertreffen-teilnehmer-bedrohen-und-attackieren-journalisten/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQKMyjgopz8
ncpin  AFD  Nazis  Journalism  FreeSpeech  nct  DGNI 
june 2018 by walt74
A viral hoax video has inspired Indian mobs to multiple, brutal murders
Link: https://boingboing.net/2018/06/20/indian-pizzagate.html

Someone edited a Pakistani child-safety education video to make it look like evidence of a ring of kidnappers was snatching children and taking them away on motorcycles; the video went viral in India, spread on Whatsapp, and it has inspired terrified mobs to attack and murder strangers on suspicion of being involved in the fictitious kidnapping rings.

The latest victims of the hoax are audio engineer Nilotpal Das and digital artist Abijeet Nath who were beaten to death when they stopped in a village in the state of Assam to ask for directions. Their murder was recorded and it, too, has gone viral -- it features one of the victims begging for his life as he is beaten.

There have been widespread protests over the hoax, with people chanting "don't believe the rumours."

The death toll from the hoax stands at eight. Dozens have been arrested for participating in mob violence.
nct  ncpin  Crime  OutrageMemetics  FakeNews  Fake  SocialMedia  DGNI 
june 2018 by walt74
The Shocking Truth About Jordan Peterson
Good takedown by Wesley Yang of Illiberal Lefts' "Peterson-Criticism" and its hyperbole rhetorics: <a href="http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/262280/jordan-peterson">The Shocking Truth About Jordan Peterson – Meme Wars: How the Twitter mobs choose their targets </a>.
Here is the Achilles’ heel of the campaign to oust Jordan Peterson from the margins of respectable society: You don’t have to outsource your judgment to journalistic authorities in the age of the internet. You can see for yourself.

Millions of people have, of course, done exactly this. Contra any framing of Peterson as a dissident or pariah, he in fact provides an articulate defense of ideas and impulses that are much more popular than those of the keepers of the orthodoxies of the “mainstream” institutions intent on de-platforming him.

And here is the strange paradox and tension of our moment. A hyperbolic rhetoric of political purism nearly surreal in its intensity has not just captured our universities, but large segments of the popular press. Glamour magazine names Linda Sarsour to its Women of the Year list. Esquire.com runs a column claiming that “powerful white men, however outfacing liberal or progressive they may appear, are the architects of structural racism and white supremacy in America.” And the New York Times laments, in the wake of a mass shooting, that the underlying cause of such extreme events is that “boys are broken,” implying that the swamp that feeds such monstrous excrescences which must be drained—is masculine identity itself.

These bizarre doctrines, incubated in the furthest reaches of the political margins (and until recently confined there), are at once expressions of political despair and the millenarian aspiration that often rises up in the wake of political defeat. The rawest forms of identity politics, grounded in the metaphysical premise that “whiteness” and “masculinity” are constructs solely predicated on a domination that we cannot hope to escape until those toxic forms of identity have been “dismantled” or “abolished,” began as provocations by radical academics. They have since become viral memes infecting the thinking and rhetoric of a certain strand of progressive activist, and through them, an ever-growing swathe of the media-making class. The resort to them is indicative of a profound failure of the political imagination.

You can hear this in the visceral contempt with which Peterson’s “young white male” audience is described by his journalistic detractors, (most of whom are white, and many of whom are male). And yet this crucial piece of hearsay, linchpin of the Peterson narrative, is not true. It hasn’t been true for a while, if it ever was. Anyone who cares to know the truth can go out and find it: I saw it myself with my own eyes at three events I attended in the winter, as did the Maclean’s reporter who found that:

They are new Canadians, people of colour, men and women. And in a way that seems out of sync with op-ed portrayals of Peterson’s supporters as committed to preserving old hierarchies and positions of privilege—they often see themselves as searchers, truth-seekers and iconoclasts.

Popularity, even among people of color, is not, of course, proof in itself of the salubriousness of anything, especially in a world where Fox News, Breitbart, and InfoWars also command the attention of tens of millions. And indeed, Peterson really was avidly embraced at first by the far-right when he emerged, denouncing concepts of unconscious bias and white privilege, and stated his intention to defy any prospective attempt through the force of law to compel him to adopt gender-neutral pronouns in his classroom at the University of Toronto. In his rather coarse-grained and Manichaean analysis of so-called Social Justice Warriors, Peterson occasionally invoked a term, “Cultural Marxism,” whose lineage was said, by others, to have also birthed a far-right conspiracy theory that, in turn, figured prominently in the manifesto of the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik. So anyone playing a game of connect the dots in order to portray Peterson as part of a recrudescence of reactionary modernism has material to work with, some of it even provided by Peterson himself.

Yet it soon enough became clear to anyone paying attention that Peterson’s initial embrace by the alt-right was a case of mistaken identity. Eventually, the spokesmen of that poisonous and amorphous internet tendency decided in concert that Peterson had been sent by the left to disrupt their “movement” and siphon off its energies by redirecting it toward an individualistic creed that would prove fatal to their own racist ethnonationalism. Peterson then rapidly crossed over to an audience that is now many multiples the size of the cohort of problematic young males who first embraced, then rejected him, even as the progressive left tried to hold on to the alt-right’s original, mistaken read.

The novel cultural role that Peterson now inhabits—as the author of one of the bestselling books in five Anglophone countries—draws its sustenance from an entirely different aspect of his message, one that I tried to evoke in a recent profile I wrote of Peterson for Esquire. That message was cleverly packaged as “self-help.” But the deeper message, which lingered on the inescapability of suffering, tragedy, limitation, and loss, enjoined those consigned to such a fate, as we all are, to meet it through taking on the heaviest burden of responsibility they could bear. In other words, a message that was antithetical to the “get rich quick,” or “visualize your way to success” ethos endemic to the genre.

Peterson’s message isn’t novel. But neither is it merely banal. Yes, much of it consists of a program of remedial socialization and stern fatherly advice for those who lack such figures in their lives. But it also created a virtual substitute able to operate at scale for an institution missing from the lives of most young Americans: the weekly sermon, in which familiar moral precepts are affirmed, and each individual is called to measure himself against shared moral values. It is conservative in the deep rather than the superficially political sense of that word—embedded in practices and institutions that have survived the test of time and demonstrated their practical utility. Indeed, it is an ethos that once could have collaborated easily enough with social democratic and redistributive politics.

But a new kind of progressive politics has emerged in recent years, one that the philosopher John Gray, writing in the TLS, recently described as a kind of “hyperliberalism.” The universities, Gray wrote, have been transformed “into institutions devoted to the eradication of thought crime.” As I’ve argued in earlier columns, this overt assault on foundational principles of free speech and conscience is linked to a substantive progressive political project to transform the country through administrative fiat.

Yes, Peterson was a ferocious opponent of a politics in a new key that purported to speak on behalf of the interests of women and racial and sexual minorities. But that did not make him an ally of the alt-right. Nor did it make him an enemy of racial or sexual minorities. He was just as much an opponent of the alt-right as he was of the identitarian left. It did not even make his ascent, as one journalist at Vox called him, “emblematic of the way white male anxiety is producing new and powerful political movements across the West today,” or as another professor writing in Vox put it, a voice for a cohort of white men resentful to find “their culture invaded by women and minorities.” These somewhat more carefully hedged modes of calling Peterson a racist succumb to a dangerous fallacy—that of equating criticism of any ideological innovation that purports to speak on behalf of minorities as itself racist. The originators of the concept of unconscious bias have themselves conceded that their tests are not predictive of biased action in the world and that no evidence exists to support programs purporting to oust this form of original sin from people’s souls—and yet corporations continue to mandate participation in such programs. It is these sorts of dubious practices that Peterson criticizes—not the pursuit of equality itself.

To give a sense of the texture of Peterson’s actual thinking on race, for instance, you could listen to his reply to a student at Lafayette College, who asked him for his view of structural racism.

“It’s a multivariate problem,” Peterson begins:

No society is without its biases and prejudices, and some of them get built into the systems themselves. And so, when you look at unequal outcomes, and you’re trying to discover why those unequal outcomes exist, if you have any sense, you do a multivariate analysis, and you put in prejudice and discrimination as one of the factors. One of the factors. One of many, many factors.

The problem with the radical leftists is they take the fact that our structures are tyrannical to some degree and arbitrary—which of course they are, because they’re imperfect—and then they obliterate the rest of the complexity with that claim. So, there’s lots of reasons for inequality. Systemic bias is one of them. It’s an open question to what degree systemic bias plays in the inequality problem. But it’s something we could hypothetically address with some degree of detachment and intelligence. No system is perfect. And certainly not ours.

You’ll notice here what is both present and missing from Peterson’s reply. He doesn’t say, for instance, that inequality is something that the white race should seek to compound for its own benefit in order to stanch the rise of minorities in a zero-sum game of interracial competition that whites should or must win. He says racial inequality is a problem that emerges in part from the … [more]
nct  ncpin  JordanPeterson  IlliberalLeft  DGNI 
june 2018 by walt74
Debatte oder Protest: Wie weiter gegen rechts? | Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik
Link: https://www.blaetter.de/archiv/jahrgaenge/2018/juni/debatte-oder-protest-wie-weiter-gegen-rechts

das intellektuelle Zentrum der Neuen Rechten, das Milieu des von Kubitschek geleiteten Antaios-Verlages, hat gar kein Interesse an einer Annäherung durch inhaltliche Auseinandersetzung, sondern verachtet die Debatte grundsätzlich: „Die Diskussion ist die Visitenkarte, mit der der Tod reist, wenn er inkognito geht“, bemüht man dort den spanischen Gegenrevolutionär Donoso Cortés. Dieser prangerte bereits im 19. Jahrhundert den revolutionären Liberalismus als Zeichen der Auflösung jeder Ordnung an. Rechten durch den Nachweis ihrer Unlogik beizukommen, läuft daher ins Leere, da sie nicht an einer kohärenten Argumentation interessiert sind.

Jede Aufnahme einer Debatte durch diese Rechte ist somit rein instrumenteller Natur. In der Antaios-Zeitschrift „Sezession“ ist nachzulesen, wie sehr man sich historisch den Verfechtern der Diktatur verpflichtet fühlt. Statt der Debatte und des Austauschs von Argumenten pflegt man einen autoritären Kult um Tat und Entscheidung. Maßgeblich ist eben nicht Habermas, sondern Cortés. Der belächelte das Bürgertum als „clasa discutidora“, als „diskutierende Klasse“, die schleunigst zum Schweigen gebracht werden müsse. Carl Schmitt formulierte in ebendiesem Geiste während der Weimarer Krisenjahre die staatsrechtlichen Grundlagen für die Diktatur. Ziel beider war das Ende der Debatte.

Für diese Denkschule ist „das ewige Gespräch“ der Liberalen eine Vorstellung von „grausamer Komik“. Daher hat Schmitt in der „Politischen Theologie“ den Diskurs als das eigentlich zu Überwindende bestimmt. Was dagegen „die gegenrevolutionäre Staatsphilosophie auszeichnet“, schreibt Schmitt, sei „das Bewusstsein, dass die Zeit eine Entscheidung verlangt“.
nct  ncpin  Politics  Right  Nazis 
june 2018 by walt74
On Being an Arsehole: A defense
Link: https://thepointmag.com/2018/examined-life/on-being-an-arsehole

“The modes of trolling are many,” writes Rachel Barney in her wonderful mock-Aristotelian treatise, “On Trolling.” Characteristic techniques include treating small problems as if they were large ones, disputing what everyone knows to be true, criticizing what everyone knows to be admirable and masking hostility with claims of friendship. If that sounds like the kind of thing Socrates got up to, this is no accident—for like Socrates, the troll claims “that he is a gadfly and beneficial, and without him to ‘stir up’ the thread it would become dull and unintelligent.” The difference, says Barney, is that while Socrates may have annoyed people, that was never his goal; he simply wanted to convince his fellow Athenians that they lacked wisdom and needed to care for their souls. The troll, by contrast, intentionally aims to generate “confusion and strife among a community who really agree,” whether for amusement or for profit or for partisan gain. Socrates was a philosopher, in other words; the troll is just an arsehole.

Yet there is surely a sense in which Socrates was trying to generate confusion and strife among Athenians (and hence, from a certain perspective, to “corrupt the youth”). After all, disagreement is hardly incidental to philosophy: when people are forced to think seriously about an argument, they tend to realize that they disagree with each other far more than they had thought. Nor is the shattering of consensus always to be regretted from a political perspective. In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” addressed to white clergymen who had asked him to reduce social conflict by limiting his battle for civil rights to the courts, Martin Luther King, Jr. invoked Socrates to support his argument that “constructive nonviolent tension … is necessary for growth.” “Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal,” he wrote, “so we must see the need of having nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men to rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.”

King’s analogy suggests that the philosopher and the activist share a common predicament, at least to some degree: both are willing to disrupt social convention and embarrass others in the name of a higher cause that typically exalts them personally, and so both run the risk of not only being perceived as, but actually being, self-aggrandizing arseholes.
nct  ncpin  Philosophy  Rhetorik  Language 
june 2018 by walt74
Mistaken Identity by Asad Haider review – the best criticism of identity politics
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/may/31/mistaken-identity-by-asad-haider-review
Amazon-Link: https://amzn.to/2sHaqKc

Haider is also a critic of identity politics, but with a crucial difference: he knows the history of the term and is working from within the tradition that produced it. As he explains, the idea has radical roots. It originated with the Combahee River Collective, an organisation of black lesbian feminist socialists in Boston who published a landmark statement in 1977: “This focusing upon our own oppression is embodied in the concept of identity politics. We believe that the most profound and potentially most radical politics come directly out of our own identity, as opposed to working to end somebody else’s oppression.”

This is the original demand of identity politics, and it’s one that Haider embraces: for a revolutionary practice rooted in people’s identities as racialised, sexed, gendered and classed individuals who face interlocking systems of oppression. These systems have to be fought together, by organising people of different identities in what Haider calls “a project of universal emancipation” devoted to dismantling all of the structures that make them unfree, including and especially capitalism itself.

But if anticapitalist revolution is where identity politics began, it has since become something quite different, and is now invoked by certain liberals and leftists to serve distinctly non-revolutionary ends, Haider argues. It involves members of marginalised groups demanding inclusion, recognition, or restitution from above – a seat at the table. These demands are made in response to very real injuries endured by those groups. But their method, he says, ends up strengthening the structures that produced those injuries in the first place.

Drawing on Wendy Brown’s idea of “wounded attachments”, Haider contends that identity politics causes people to become invested in their marginalisation as a source of identity, and to continuously enact that identity as a form of politics. This approach can extract occasional concessions from the system but cannot build the power necessary to transform it.

Building that power will require forging a “new insurgent universality”, Haider believes. This doesn’t mean pretending that everyone is the same. It doesn’t mean elevating one identity – that of the white male worker, say – above all others. Rather, the universality that Haider wants is built from below. It is “created and recreated in the act of insurgency”, as people come together to combat the common enemy lurking behind their particular oppressions. Freedom for ourselves – whoever “we” are – is inseparable from freedom for everyone. If emancipation is always self-emancipation, self-emancipation is always a collective endeavour.
nct  ncpin  IdentityPolitics  Books  Identity  DGNI 
june 2018 by walt74
Our fiction addiction: Why humans need stories
Link: http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20180503-our-fiction-addiction-why-humans-need-stories

psychologists and literary theorists have now identified many potential benefits to this fiction addiction. One common idea is that storytelling is a form of cognitive play that hones our minds, allowing us to simulate the world around us and imagine different strategies, particularly in social situations. “It teaches us about other people and it’s a practice in empathy and theory of mind,” says Joseph Carroll at the University of Missouri-St Louis.

The Agta, a Filipino hunter-gatherer population, have long shared stories containing messages of equality between men and women (Credit: Paulo Sayeg)
Providing some evidence for this theory, brain scans have shown that reading or hearing stories activates various areas of the cortex that are known to be involved in social and emotional processing, and the more people read fiction, the easier they find it to empathise with other people.

Crucially, evolutionary psychologists believe that our prehistoric preoccupations still shape the form of the stories we enjoy. As humans evolved to live in bigger societies, for instance, we needed to learn how to cooperate, without being a ‘free rider’ who takes too much and gives nothing, or overbearing individuals abusing their dominance to the detriment of the group’s welfare. Our capacity for storytelling – and the tales we tell – may have therefore also evolved as a way of communicating the right social norms. “The lesson is to resist tyranny and don’t become a tyrant yourself,” Kruger said.

Along these lines, various studies have identified cooperation as a core theme in popular narratives across the world. The anthropologist Daniel Smith of University College London recently visited 18 groups of hunter-gatherers of the Philippines. He found nearly 80% of their tales concerned moral decision making and social dilemmas (as opposed to stories about, say, nature). Crucially, this then appeared to translate to their real-life behaviour; the groups that appeared to invest the most in storytelling also proved to be the most cooperative during various experimental tasks – exactly as the evolutionary theory would suggest. […]

In his book On the Origin of Stories, Brian Boyd of the University of Auckland describes how these themes are also evident in Homer’s Odyssey. As Penelope waits for Odysseus’s return, her suitors spend all day eating and drinking at her home. When he finally arrives in the guise of a poor beggar, however, they begrudge offering him any shelter (in his own home!). They ultimately get their comeuppance as Odysseus removes his disguise and wreaks a bloody revenge.

You might assume that our interest in cooperation would have dwindled with the increasing individualism of the Industrial Revolution, but Kruger and Carroll have found that these themes were still prevalent in some of the most beloved British novels from the 19th and early 20th Centuries.

Asking a panel of readers to rate the principal characters in more than 200 novels (beginning with Jane Austen and ending with EM Forster), the researchers found that the antagonists’ major flaw was most often a quest for social dominance at the expense of others or an abuse of their existing power, while the protagonists appeared to be less individualistic and ambitious.
Storytelling  nct  ncpin  Psychology  EvoPsych  Anthropology  Science  JordanPeterson 
june 2018 by walt74
Jordan Peterson Lights Up The Right With Rational Explanations Of Why Tradition Matters
Link: https://thefederalist.com/2018/06/04/jordan-peterson-lights-right-rational-explanations-tradition-matters/

What makes Peterson’s message importantly different and provocative is not the content of his advice and rules, but rather the manner and strength of his rationale. Peterson is, at least at his best, a rational traditionalist: he stakes a claim for Western tradition based not, as Michael Oakeshott says of the conservative temperament, on a preference for the familiar simply because it is familiar, but rather on reason, scientific evidence, and his experience as a clinical psychologist.

Traditionalists feel a personal belonging to and affinity for their collective heritage. Through passed down institutions, art, codes of conduct, celebrations, and stories, the traditionalist is uniquely connected to a way of life that is greater than any one individual. He does not care for his tradition because it accords with any particular abstract ethic, such as because it produces happiness, pleasure, or freedom. Rather, he cares to preserve his tradition because it is his heritage. A traditionalist about marriage, for example, may well believe it is good to give equal rights to gay people, and yet want to preserve marriage as an institution between a man and a woman.

Rationalists do not have this sense of personal belonging, They follow abstract ethical ideals, such as pleasure, happiness, and freedom, that are not tied to any particular tradition. Rather than deciding what to do with tradition based upon preservig a way of life, the rationalist asks whether it will work toward the ethical ideal.

Without tradition we move in the abstract space of ideals; without rationalism we remain bound by tradition. Even if they are dogmatic, the loss of our traditions is the loss of our way of life, our living history, our great supra-individual body. But the loss of our rationalism would mean the inability to change our traditions so they can better serve the individual. We want to revivify our heritage while maintaining a way to discriminate between aspects of our tradition; to say, in an abstract sense, what is good and what is bad.

Peterson helps resolve this conflict by basing a defense of Western tradition upon rationalism.
nct  ncpin  JordanPeterson  Conservatism  Tradition  Politics  Philosophy 
june 2018 by walt74
Why Trump Is Winning and the Press Is Losing
Link: http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/04/25/why-trump-is-winning-and-the-press-is-losing/

There is a risk that journalists could do their job brilliantly, and it won’t really matter, because Trump supporters categorically reject it, Trump opponents already believed it, and the neither-nors aren’t paying close enough attention. In a different way, there is a risk that journalists could succeed at the production of great journalism and fail at its distribution, because the platforms created by the tech industry have so overtaken the task of organizing public attention.

There is an obvious risk that the press will lose touch with the country, fall out of contact with American culture. Newsroom diversity is supposed to prevent that, but the diversity project has itself been undermined by a longer and deeper project in mainstream journalism, which I have called the View from Nowhere, by which I mean the attempt to acquire authority by constructing an artificial impartiality, by “performing objectivity.”

At the same time, the press is at risk of losing its institutional footing. For instance, in the hands of Sean Spicer and Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House briefing has gone to ruin. It was always frustrating—now it’s useless, even counterproductive.

Many floors below the surface of journalism there are bedrock attitudes that make the practice possible—and thinkable. For example: the belief in informed consent, or that information sources independent of the state are needed to monitor the state. There is a risk of erosion there. When the president of the United States forcefully rejects the premise of a common world of fact, and behaves like there is no such thing, any practice resting on that premise is in political trouble. This has happened to journalism. No one knows what to do about it.

There is a risk that established forms of journalism will be unable to handle the strain that Trump’s behavior places upon them. For example, the practice we came to call fact-checking has had zero effect in preventing the president from repeating falsehoods. There is a risk that the press will hang onto these forms well past their sell-by date because it’s what they know. They want things to be normal. […]

I will conclude with something Steve Bannon put to the author Michael Lewis earlier this year. “The Democrats don’t matter,” Bannon said. “The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.” To this kind of provocation, Marty Baron, editor of The Washington Post, has a succinct reply: “We’re not at war, we’re at work.” I think our top journalists are correct that if they become the political opposition to Trump, they will lose. And yet, they have to go to war against a political style in which power gets to write its own story.

There is a risk that they will fail to make this distinction. In my role as a critic, I have been trying to alert them to that danger. I cannot say it’s working.
Journalism  Media  ncpin  nct  DonaldTrump  DGNI 
may 2018 by walt74
Trillions Upon Trillions of Viruses Fall From the Sky Each Day
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/13/science/virosphere-evolution.html

Scientists have surmised there is a stream of viruses circling the planet, above the planet’s weather systems but below the level of airline travel. Very little is known about this realm, and that’s why the number of deposited viruses stunned the team in Spain. Each day, they calculated, some 800 million viruses cascade onto every square meter of the planet.

Most of the globe-trotting viruses are swept into the air by sea spray, and lesser numbers arrive in dust storms.

“Unimpeded by friction with the surface of the Earth, you can travel great distances, and so intercontinental travel is quite easy” for viruses, said Curtis Suttle, a marine virologist at the University of British Columbia. “It wouldn’t be unusual to find things swept up in Africa being deposited in North America.”

The study by Dr. Suttle and his colleagues, published earlier this year in the International Society of Microbial Ecology Journal, was the first to count the number of viruses falling onto the planet. The research, though, is not designed to study influenza or other illnesses, but to get a better sense of the “virosphere,” the world of viruses on the planet.

Generally it’s assumed these viruses originate on the planet and are swept upward, but some researchers theorize that viruses actually may originate in the atmosphere. (There is a small group of researchers who believe viruses may even have come here from outer space, an idea known as panspermia.)
Biology  Science  ncpin  nct  Viruses 
may 2018 by walt74
Geflüchtete, Islam, AfD: So toxisch ist die Debatte im Netz
Unsere Analyse macht deutlich: Von einem diffusen „Hass im Netz“ lässt sich nicht sprechen. Was wir gefunden haben, sind Wortmeldungen aus ganz konkreten rechten Diskursen, die überall dort auftauchen, wo Politikerinnen und Politiker über Migration, Muslime und die AfD sprechen. Die technischen Ansätze der Internet-Plattformen und neue rechtliche Vorgaben der Bundesregierung wie das NetzDG greifen daher zu kurz. Rechte Hetze im Netz lässt sich nicht technisch und rechtlich lösen, sondern nur mit Gegenrede. Wir müssen auf die Hetzer antworten.

Link: https://netzpolitik.org/2018/gefluechtete-islam-afd-so-toxisch-ist-die-debatte-im-netz
nct  ncpin  Right  Hatespeech  Outrage  OutrageMemetics  AFD  SocialMedia  Nazis  Immigration  DGNI 
may 2018 by walt74
I was Jordan Peterson’s strongest supporter. Now I think he’s dangerous
Respectful but still powerful takedown of some of Petersons most unnerving shticks (harsh tendencies, aggressiveness, superficial readings of postmodernism and, new to me, ambitions in political leadership). And its not coming from anyone, but a former colleague and friend.

I recommend this to everyone following the guy. Actually, I *especially* recommend this to those who pay close attention to Peterson.

Link: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html
Jordan’s first high-profile public battle, and for many people their introduction to the man, followed his declaration that he would not comply with Bill C-16, an amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act extending its protections to include gender identity and expression. He would refuse to refer to students using gender neutral pronouns. He then upped the stakes by claiming that, for this transgression, he could be sent to jail.

I have a trans daughter, but that was hardly an issue compared to what I felt was a betrayal of my trust and confidence in him. It was an abuse of the trust that comes with his professorial position, which I had fought for, to have misrepresented gender science by dismissing the evidence that the relationship of gender to biology is not absolute and to have made the claim that he could be jailed when, at worst, he could be fined.

In his defence, Jordan told me if he refused to pay the fine he could go to jail. That is not the same as being jailed for what you say, but it did ennoble him as a would-be martyr in the defence of free speech. He was a true free speech “warrior” who was willing to sacrifice and run roughshod over his students to make a point. He could have spared his students and chosen to sidestep the issue and refer to them by their names. And if this was truly a matter of free speech he could have challenged the Human Rights Act, off-campus and much earlier, by openly using language offensive to any of the already-protected groups on that list.

Perhaps this was not just about free speech.

Not long afterwards the following message was sent from his wife’s email address exhorting recipients to sign a petition opposing Ontario’s Bill 28. That bill proposed changing the language in legislation about families from “mother” and “father” to the gender-neutral “parents.”

“A new bill, introduced in Ontario on September 29th, subjugates the natural family to the transgender agenda. The bill — misleadingly called the ‘All Families Are Equal Act’ — is moving extremely fast. We must ACT NOW to stop this bill from passing into law.”

This is not a free-speech issue so Jordan is wearing a different political hat. And what does a “transgender agenda” have to do with a bill protecting same-sex parents? What is this all about?

Jordan has studied and understands authoritarian demagogic leaders. They know how to attract a following. In an interview with Ethan Klein in an H3 Podcast, Jordan describes how such leaders learn to repeat those things which make the crowd roar, and not repeat those things that do not. The crowd roared the first time Jordan opposed the so-called “transgender agenda.” Perhaps they would roar again, whether it made sense or not.

But why “transgender” in the first place? In that same interview, Jordan cites Carl Jung, who talked about the effectiveness of powerful emotional oratorical skills to tap into the collective unconscious of a people, and into their anger, resentment, fear of chaos and need for order. He talked about how those demagogic leaders led by acting out the dark desires of the mob.

If we have a “collective unconscious” there is a good chance that it would include our primitive assumptions about gender and biology. Transgender people violate those assumptions. There is an historical example of how upset our species gets about gender ambiguity in other species. The female spotted hyena is larger than, and dominant over, the male and has a clitoris so enlarged as to have the external appearance of a penis. In the bestiaries of the Middle Ages they were reviled, described as “neither faithful or pagan,” “brutal thugs,” “sexual deviants” and “not to be trusted.” Sir Walter Raleigh excluded the hyena from Noah’s Ark in his History of the World (written in 1614) because he believed that God had saved only the purely bred. That historical lesson tells us how deeply disturbed many of us might be in response to gender ambiguity in human beings.

Transgender people appear early in human history but in these socially progressive times, which worry Jordan so much, they have become more visible. Consciously or not, Jordan may have understood that transgender people tap into society’s “collective unconscious” and would become a lightning rod for attention loaded with anger and resentment. And it did.

More recently, when questioned about the merits of 12 Rules for Life, Jordan answered that he must be doing something right because of the huge response the book has received. How odd given what he said in that same interview about demagogues and cheering crowds. In an article published in January in the Spectator, Douglas Murray described the atmosphere at one of Jordan’s talks as “ecstatic.”

I have no way of knowing whether Jordan is aware that he is playing out of the same authoritarian demagogue handbook that he himself has described. If he is unaware, then his ironic failure, unwillingness, or inability to see in himself what he attributes to them is very disconcerting. […]

Jordan exhibits a great range of emotional states, from anger and abusive speech to evangelical fierceness, ministerial solemnity and avuncular charm. It is misleading to come to quick conclusions about who he is, and potentially dangerous if you have seen only the good and thoughtful Jordan, and not seen the bad.

Shortly after Jordan’s rise to notoriety back in 2016, I emailed him to express my upset with his dishonesty and lack of intellectual and social integrity. He called in a conciliatory voice the next morning. I was reiterating my disappointment and upset when he interrupted me, saying more or less the following:

“You don’t understand. I am willing to lose everything, my home, my job etc., because I believe in this.” And then he said, with the intensity he is now famous for, “Bernie. Tammy had a dream, and sometimes her dreams are prophetic. She dreamed that it was five minutes to midnight.”

That was our last conversation. He was playing out the ideas that appeared in his first book. The social order is coming apart. We are on the edge of chaos. He is the prophet, and he would be the martyr. Jordan would be our saviour. I think he believes that.

He may be driven by a great and genuine fear of our impending doom, and a passionate conviction that he can save us from it. He may believe that his ends justify his questionable means, and he may not be aware that he mimics those figures from whom he wants to protect us. But his conviction makes him no less problematic. On the contrary.

“What they do have in common is … that they have the answers and that their instincts are good, that they are smarter than everybody else and can do things by themselves.” This was Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state in an recent interview with the New York Times referring to the authoritarian leaders discussed in her new book, Fascism: A Warning. It sounds familiar. […]

Jordan is a powerful orator. He is smart, compelling and convincing. His messages can be strong and clear, oversimplified as they often are, to be very accessible. He has played havoc with the truth. He has studied demagogues and authoritarians and understands the power of their methods. Fear and danger were their fertile soil. He frightens by invoking murderous bogeymen on the left and warning they are out to destroy the social order, which will bring chaos and destruction.

Jordan’s view of the social order is now well known.

He is a biological and Darwinian determinist. Gender, gender roles, dominance hierarchies, parenthood, all firmly entrenched in our biological heritage and not to be toyed with. Years ago when he was living in my house, he said children are little monkeys trying to clamber up the dominance hierarchy and need to be kept in their place. I thought he was being ironic. Apparently, not.

He is also very much like the classic Social Darwinists who believe that “attempts to reform society through state intervention or other means would … interfere with natural processes; unrestricted competition and defence of the status quo were in accord with biological selection.” (Encylopedia Britannica, 2018.) From the same source: “Social Darwinism declined during the 20th century as an expanded knowledge of biological, social and cultural phenomena undermined, rather than supported, its basic tenets.” Jordan remains stuck in and enthralled by The Call of the Wild.

We should be concerned about his interest in politics. It is clear what kind of country he would want to have or, if he could, lead.
nct  ncpin  JordanPeterson  CampusPolitics  Feminism  DGNI 
may 2018 by walt74
« earlier      
per page:    204080120160

related tags

4chan  Academia  AFD  AI  AlgoCulture  AltRight  Amok  Anthropology  Art  AttentionEconomy  AugmentedReality  Avatar  BadJournalism  Bankster  BigBrother  BigData  Biology  Bitcoins  Blogs  Books  Bots  Brexit  Bullshit  Bullying  Businessbullshit  CamillePaglia  CampusPolitics  Capitalism  Celebrities  ChaosTheory  Chemistry  China  Climate  CollectiveGuilt  Collectivism  Communism  Complexity  ComputerVision  Consciousness  Conservatism  Conspiracy  Copyright  Creativity  Crime  CultivationTheory  CulturalAppropriation  CultureLoop  CyberBullying  Cyberbullying  DavidFosterWallace  db  DDR  Debattenkultur  Demographie  DGNI  Diversity  DIY  DonaldTrump  Drugs  Dystopia  Economy  Education  Election  Environment  Epistemology  EU  Europe  EvoPsych  Extraversion  Face2Face  Facebook  FaceRecognition  Facetracking  Fake  FakeNews  Fascism  Fashion  Feminism  Filterbubbles  FilterBubbles  Finance  FreeSpeech  Gamergate  Games  Gender  GenderGap  Genetics  Germany  Globalisierung  Globalism  Globalization  Google  Grundeinkommen  GuiltByAssociation  Hatespeech  HateSpeech  Heimat  Hierarchy  Hippies  History  Hoax  Holocaust  HumanRights  IB  Identity  IdentityPolitics  IlliberalLeft  Immigration  Individualism  InformationOverload  Innovation  Instagram  IntellectualDarkWeb  Internet  Intersectionality  Interview  Islam  JamesDamore  Japan  JordanPeterson  Journalism  Kids  Kybernetik  Language  Left  Legal  LegalThreat  Linksidentitäre  Literature  Luxury  MachineLearning  Marketing  Marvel  Mathematics  Media  Memetics  Memory  MentalHealth  MeshNetworks  MetricSystem  Microagressions  Morals  Movies  Music  Mythology  Nationalism  Nazis  ncpin  nct  NerdPowerComplex  Netflix  Neur  Neuroscience  NewLeft  News  OppressionOlympics  Outrage  OutrageMemetics  Paleontology  Paper  Papers  Patterns  Perception  Philosophy  Physics  Polarization  PoliticalCorrectness  Politics  Populism  PostModernism  PostTruth  Privacy  Psychology  Reddit  Refugees  Religion  Reputation  Rhetorik  Right  Russia  Science  Selfies  SelfOrganization  Series  Sexism  SlavojZizek  SocialBots  SocialControlSystem  SocialMedia  Soziologie  SPD  Storys  Storytelling  Streaming  Städteplanung  Superheroes  Surveillance  Swatting  TalkingHeads  Tech  Terrorism  TheBigStandstill  ToxicMasculinity  Tradition  Trolls  Trust  TV  Twitter  Units  Urban  USA  Utopia  VictimhoodCulture  Violence  Viral  VirtualReality  Viruses  Volt  VR  Work  Writing  Youth  Youtube 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: